SEC Petition Evaluation Report

Petition SEC-00221 

Report Rev Number: 0

Report Submittal Date: February 12, 2016

Subject Expert(s): Tim Adler, Robert Burns, Roger Halsey, Monica Harrison-Maples

Site Expert(s): N/A

Petition Administrative Summary

Petition Under Evaluation 

Petition Number: SEC-00221

Petition Type: 83.13

Petition Receipt Date: October 7, 2014

Qualification Date: January 6, 2015

DOE/AWE Facility Name: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Petition Class

Petitioner-Requested Class 

Definition:

All DOE or DOE contractor employees who worked in any area at the Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory within the 7000 East Avenue location in 

Livermore, California, or within the Site 300 location in Tracy, California, from 

January 1, 1975 through October 28, 2014.

Class Evaluated by NIOSH: All employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its 

contractors and subcontractors who worked in any area at the Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period from January 1, 

1974 through December 31, 1989.

NIOSH-Proposed Class(es) to be 

Added to the SEC:

All employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its 

contractors and subcontractors who worked in any area at the Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period from January 1, 

1974 through December 31, 1989, for a number of work days aggregating at least 

250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination 

with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC.

Related Petition Summary Information

SEC Petition Tracking Number(s): SEC-00092 and SEC-00163

Petition Type: 83.14

DOE/AWE Facility Name: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Petition Status: SEC-00092: Class added for to the SEC for January 1, 1950 through December 

31, 1973, for employees with an indication of having been in the radiation 

monitoring program. 

SEC-00163: Class added to the SEC expanded to include “all employees” for 

January 1, 1950 through December 31, 1973, eliminating the “who were 

monitored or should have been monitored” distinction.

Related Evaluation Report Information 

Report Title: SEC Petition Evaluation Report for Petition SEC-00092 

SEC Petition Evaluation Report for Petition SEC-00163

DOE/AWE Facility Name: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

ORAU Preparation and Review

ORAU Lead Technical Evaluator: Robert Burns

ORAU Peer Review Completed By: Michael Kubiak
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

2 of 69 

DCAS Review and Approval

Peer Review Completed By:

[Signature on File] 

Mark Rolfes 

February 12, 2016

SEC Petition Evaluation Reviewed 

By: [Signature on File] 

James W. Neton 

February 12, 2016

SEC Petition Evaluation Reviewed 

By: [Signature on File] 

Stuart L. Hinnefeld 

February 12, 2016
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

3 of 69 

Evaluation Report Summary: SEC-00221, Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory (LLNL)

This evaluation report by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

addresses a class of employees proposed for addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) per the

Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 

§ 7384 et seq. (EEOICPA) and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees as 

Members of the Special Exposure Cohort under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program Act of 2000. 

Petitioner-Requested Class Definition

Petition SEC-00221 was received on October 7, 2014, and qualified on January 6, 2015. The 

petitioner requested that NIOSH consider the following class: All DOE or DOE contractor employees 

who worked in any area at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory within the 7000 East Avenue 

location in Livermore, California, or within the Site 300 location in Tracy, California, from January 

1, 1975 through October 28, 2014. 

Class Evaluated by NIOSH

Based on its preliminary research, NIOSH modified the petitioner-requested class. NIOSH qualified 

the following class for evaluation: All employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor 

agencies, and its contractors and subcontractors who worked in any area at the Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period from January 1, 1974 through 

December 31, 1995. 

For the purposes of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and 

feasibility conclusions for uranium-233 (U-233) exposures in Building 251 only through December 

31, 1989. NIOSH will continue to review and evaluate remaining dose contributors for the 1974–

1989 period as well as for the period 1990–1995 for all areas and buildings of the Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) site. NIOSH evaluated the following class in this report: All 

employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its contractors and 

subcontractors who worked in any area at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, 

California, during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 

NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC 

Based on its research to date of the class under evaluation, NIOSH has defined a single class of 

employees for which NIOSH cannot estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy. The NIOSHproposed class includes all employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its 

contractors and subcontractors who worked in any area at the Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 

1989, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this 

employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more 

other classes of employees in the SEC. The class under evaluation was accepted (see Section 3.0 

below) because information presently available to NIOSH does not provide evidence that the gross 

alpha bioassay measurements, upon which some coworker analyses are based, include all potential 

exposure scenarios of concern. Further NIOSH review and assessment will be necessary to fully 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

4 of 69 

complete the evaluation of all internal and external exposures during the period of the proposed class, 

and during the remaining qualified period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1995. 

Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction

Per EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1), NIOSH has established that it does not have access to 

sufficient information to: (1) estimate the maximum radiation dose, for every type of cancer for which 

radiation doses are reconstructed, that could have been incurred in plausible circumstances by any 

member of the class; or (2) estimate radiation doses of members of the class more precisely than an 

estimate of maximum dose. Information available from the Site Profile and additional resources is not 

sufficient to document or estimate the maximum internal and external potential exposure to members 

of the proposed class under plausible circumstances during the specified period. 

The NIOSH dose reconstruction feasibility findings are based on the following: 

• NIOSH finds that it is feasible to reconstruct occupational medical dose for LLNL workers with 

sufficient accuracy during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 

• Principal sources of internal and external radiation for members of the proposed class included 

exposures to isotopes of uranium and thorium, highly enriched uranium, plutonium, americium, 

curium, neptunium, and other exotic materials in Building 251, the Heavy Elements Facility. 

Potential exposures to the members of the proposed class involved operations such as nuclear 

tracer fabrication, radiochemical analysis of bomb debris, and chemical research into transuranic 

radionuclides, including work with high-specific-activity sample processing.

• NIOSH has determined that it has insufficient information to verify that the routine in vitro

bioassay program for Building 251 workers (combinations of analyses for gross alpha in urine, 

gross beta in urine, and plutonium in urine) was adequately sensitive for detection of U-233 

intakes during the period under evaluation. 

• Similarly, NIOSH has determined that photon-emitting decay products and contaminants cannot 

be assumed to have been sufficiently present in the U-233 source term to verify that the routine in 

vivo bioassay program for Building 251 workers was adequately sensitive for detection of U-233 

intakes during the period under evaluation. 

• Information available to NIOSH from multiple site inspections performed from 1980 to 1991 

indicate deficiencies in LLNL’s implementation of the air monitoring program in Building 251. 

NIOSH has determined the air monitoring data from Building 251 may not be adequately 

representative of the worker breathing zones, and are consequently not considered sufficient for 

Building 251 dose reconstruction during the period under evaluation. 

• Information currently available to NIOSH contains insufficient access control information or 

records for Building 251, and insufficient general site worker movement data, to allow NIOSH to 

accurately assess whether an energy employee, or class of employees, did or did not potentially 

enter Building 251 during the period under evaluation. NIOSH therefore recommends the 

extension of the recommended class to include all LLNL workers during the period from January 

1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

5 of 69 

• NIOSH review of material inventory records indicates that U-233 was refined into end products in 

Building 251 through at least 1988. In 1989, the frequency and nature of U-233 transfers changed 

indicating a possible change in U-233 production or usage. Pending further evaluation, NIOSH 

recommends an end date of December 31, 1989, for the SEC class recommended in this report. 

NIOSH finds that it is not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy the internal doses for 

LLNL workers during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 

• For the purposes of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency 

and feasibility conclusions to date, but will continue to review and evaluate internal exposures 

other than U-233 during the period from 1974–1989, and all internal exposures during the period 

from 1990–1995. 

• Consistent with the findings of NIOSH’s 2010 evaluation of the LLNL SEC-00163, NIOSH finds 

that external dose for photon, beta, and neutron exposures can likely be reconstructed for all 

members of the evaluated class for the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 

NIOSH will continue to perform a full evaluation of external exposures during the period from 

1974–1995. 

• Pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1), NIOSH determined that there is insufficient information to 

either: (1) estimate the maximum radiation dose, for every type of cancer for which radiation 

doses are reconstructed, that could have been incurred under plausible circumstances by any 

member of the class; or (2) estimate the radiation doses of members of the class more precisely 

than a maximum dose estimate.

• Although NIOSH found that it is not possible to completely reconstruct radiation doses for the 

proposed class, NIOSH intends to use any internal and external monitoring data that may become 

available for an individual claim (and that can be interpreted using existing NIOSH dose 

reconstruction processes or procedures). Therefore, dose reconstructions for individuals employed 

at LLNL during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989, but who do not 

qualify for inclusion in the SEC, may be performed using these data as appropriate. 

Health Endangerment Determination

Per EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3), a health endangerment determination is required because 

NIOSH has determined that it does not have sufficient information to estimate dose for the members 

of the proposed class. 

NIOSH did not identify any evidence supplied by the petitioners or from other resources that would 

establish that the proposed class was exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have 

involved exceptionally high-level exposures. However, evidence indicates that some workers in the 

proposed class have accumulated chronic exposures through intakes of radionuclides, combined with 

external exposures to gamma, beta, and neutron radiation. In the absence of high-level incident 

exposures, 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3)(ii) requires NIOSH to specify that health was endangered for those 

workers covered by this evaluation who were employed for at least 250 aggregated work days either 

solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for 

one or more other SEC classes. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

6 of 69 

This page intentionally left blank
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

7 of 69 

Table of Contents

Evaluation Report Summary: SEC-00221, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) ........... 3

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 7

1.0 Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................................... 9

2.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 9

3.0 SEC-00221, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Class Definitions .................................. 10

3.1 Petitioner-Requested Class Definition and Basis ................................................................ 10

3.2 Class Evaluated by NIOSH ................................................................................................. 11

3.3 NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC ................................................................ 12

4.0 Data Sources Reviewed by NIOSH to Evaluate the Class ........................................................... 12

4.1 Site Profile Technical Basis Documents (TBDs) ................................................................ 12

4.2 ORAU Technical Information Bulletins (OTIBs) ............................................................... 13

4.3 Facility Employees and Experts .......................................................................................... 13

4.4 Previous Dose Reconstructions ........................................................................................... 14

4.5 NIOSH Site Research Database .......................................................................................... 15

4.6 Other Technical Sources ...................................................................................................... 15

4.7 Documentation and/or Affidavits Provided by Petitioners ................................................. 16

5.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Class Evaluated by NIOSH ......................................... 16

5.1 LLNL Plant and Process Descriptions ................................................................................ 17

5.1.1 Building 251 ............................................................................................................ 19

5.1.2 Building 251 Access Control ................................................................................... 22

5.2 Radiological Exposure Sources from LLNL Operations in Building 251 .......................... 23

5.2.1 Internal Radiological Exposure Sources from LLNL Building 251 Operations ..... 23

5.2.2 External Radiological Exposure Sources from LLNL Building 251 Operations .... 24

5.2.2.1 Beta/Photon .............................................................................................. 25

5.2.2.2 Neutron ..................................................................................................... 25

5.2.3 Incidents .................................................................................................................. 25

6.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Class Evaluated by NIOSH ............................. 26

6.1 Available LLNL Internal Monitoring Data ......................................................................... 26

6.1.1 In Vitro Bioassay (General) ..................................................................................... 26

6.1.2 In Vitro Bioassay Results for Building 251 ............................................................. 27

6.1.3 In Vivo Bioassay (General) ...................................................................................... 27

6.1.4 In Vivo Bioassay Results for Building 251 .............................................................. 28

6.1.5 Air Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 28

6.2 Available LLNL External Monitoring Data ........................................................................ 29

7.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Class Evaluated by NIOSH ...................................... 30

7.1 Pedigree of LLNL Data ....................................................................................................... 31

7.1.1 Internal Monitoring Data Pedigree Review ............................................................. 31

7.1.2 External Monitoring Data Pedigree Review ............................................................ 31

7.2 Evaluation of Bounding Internal Radiation Doses at LLNL ............................................... 32

7.2.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process Related Internal Doses ........................................ 32

7.2.1.1 Urinalysis Information and Available Data .............................................. 32

7.2.1.2 In Vivo Counting Information and Available Data ................................... 32

7.2.1.3 Airborne Levels ........................................................................................ 32

7.2.1.4 Alternative Data Sources for Bounding Internal Dose ............................. 33

7.2.2 Evaluation of Bounding Ambient Environmental Internal Doses ........................... 33

7.2.3 Methods for Bounding Internal Dose at LLNL ....................................................... 33
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

8 of 69 

7.2.3.1 Methods for Bounding Operational Period Internal Dose ........................ 33

7.2.3.2 Methods for Bounding Ambient Environmental Internal Dose ............... 34

7.2.4 Internal Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion ............................................. 34

7.3 Evaluation of Bounding External Radiation Doses at LLNL .............................................. 35

7.3.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process-Related External Doses ....................................... 36

7.3.1.1 Personnel Monitoring ............................................................................... 36

7.3.1.2 Area Monitoring ....................................................................................... 37

7.3.2 Evaluation of Bounding Ambient Environmental External Doses .......................... 37

7.3.3 LLNL Occupational X-Ray Examinations .............................................................. 37

7.3.4 Methods for Bounding External Dose at LLNL ...................................................... 38

7.3.4.1 Methods for Bounding Process-Related External Dose ........................... 38

7.3.4.2 Methods for Bounding Ambient Environmental External Doses ............. 39

7.3.5 External Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion ............................................ 39

7.4 Evaluation of Petition Basis for SEC-00221 ....................................................................... 39

7.4.1 Implementation of Workplace Radiological Controls ............................................. 39

7.4.2 Adequacy of the NIOSH LLNL Site Profile ........................................................... 40

7.4.3 Adequacy of the LLNL Radiological Protection Program ...................................... 40

7.5 Other Potential SEC Issues Relevant to the Petition Identified During the Evaluation ...... 41

7.5.1 Adequacy of Gross Alpha In Vitro Monitoring Program ........................................ 41

7.5.2 Adequacy of Internal Dose Coworker Distributions ............................................... 41

7.5.3 Representativeness of Workplace Air Monitoring .................................................. 41

7.6 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00221 .................................................. 42

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00221 ...................................................... 43

9.0 Class Conclusion for Petition SEC-00221 ................................................................................... 43

10.0 References .................................................................................................................................... 45

Attachment One: Data Capture Synopsis .............................................................................................. 51

Tables 

Table 4-1: No. of LLNL Claims Submitted Under the Dose Reconstruction Rule .............................. 15

Table 5-1: Main Laboratory Site Building Numbers ............................................................................ 18

Table 5-2: Site 300 Building Numbers .................................................................................................. 19

Table 6-1: In Vitro Results for Building 251 ......................................................................................... 27

Table 7-1: Summary of Feasibility Findings for SEC-00221 (January 1, 1974–December 31, 1989) . 42

Table A1-1: Summary of Holdings in the SRDB for LLNL ................................................................. 53

Table A1-2: Database Searches for LLNL ............................................................................................ 68

Figures 

Figure 5-1: Map of LLNL Site .............................................................................................................. 17

Figure 5-2: Building 251, Floor Plan, First Floor ................................................................................. 20

Figure 5-3: Building 251, Floor Plan, Mezzanine ................................................................................. 21
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

9 of 69 

SEC Petition Evaluation Report for SEC-00221

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: This is a single-author document. All conclusions drawn from 

the data presented in this evaluation were made by the ORAU Team Lead Technical Evaluator: 

Robert Burns, NGTS, Inc. The rationales for all conclusions in this document are explained in the 

associated text.

1.0 Purpose and Scope

This report evaluates the feasibility of reconstructing doses for all employees of the Department of 

Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its contractors and subcontractors who worked in any area at the 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period from January 1, 

1974 through December 31, 1989. It provides information and analyses germane to considering a 

petition for adding a class of employees to the congressionally-created SEC. 

This report does not make any determinations concerning the feasibility of dose reconstruction that 

necessarily apply to any individual energy employee who might require a dose reconstruction from 

NIOSH. This report also does not contain the final determination as to whether the proposed class 

will be added to the SEC (see Section 2.0). 

This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the requirements of EEOICPA, 42 C.F.R. pt. 83, 

and the guidance contained in the Division of Compensation Analysis and Support’s (DCAS) Internal 

Procedures for the Evaluation of Special Exposure Cohort Petitions, DCAS-PR-004. 1

2.0 Introduction 

Both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 require NIOSH to evaluate qualified petitions requesting that the 

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) add a class of employees to the SEC. The 

evaluation is intended to provide a fair, science-based determination of whether it is feasible to 

estimate with sufficient accuracy the radiation doses of the class of employees through NIOSH dose 

reconstructions. 2

42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1) states: Radiation doses can be estimated with sufficient accuracy if NIOSH 

has established that it has access to sufficient information to estimate the maximum radiation dose, 

for every type of cancer for which radiation doses are reconstructed, that could have been incurred in 

plausible circumstances by any member of the class, or if NIOSH has established that it has access to 

sufficient information to estimate the radiation doses of members of the class more precisely than an 

estimate of the maximum radiation dose.

Under 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3), if it is not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy radiation doses 

for members of the class, then NIOSH must determine that there is a reasonable likelihood that such 

 

1 DCAS was formerly known as the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS).

2 NIOSH dose reconstructions under EEOICPA are performed using the methods promulgated under 42 C.F.R. pt. 82 and 

the detailed implementation guidelines available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

10 of 69 

radiation doses may have endangered the health of members of the class. The regulation requires 

NIOSH to assume that any duration of unprotected exposure may have endangered the health of 

members of a class when it has been established that the class may have been exposed to radiation 

during a discrete incident likely to have involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring 

during nuclear criticality incidents. If the occurrence of such an exceptionally high-level exposure has 

not been established, then NIOSH is required to specify that health was endangered for those workers 

who were employed for at least 250 aggregated work days within the parameters established for the 

class or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other SEC 

classes. 

NIOSH is required to document its evaluation in a report, and to do so, relies upon both its own dose 

reconstruction expertise as well as technical support from its contractor, Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities (ORAU). Once completed, NIOSH provides the report to both the petitioner(s) and the 

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (Board). The Board will consider the NIOSH 

evaluation report, together with the petition, petitioner(s) comments, and other information the Board 

considers appropriate, in order to make recommendations to the Secretary of HHS on whether or not 

to add one or more classes of employees to the SEC. Once NIOSH has received and considered the 

advice of the Board, the Director of NIOSH will propose a decision on behalf of HHS. The Secretary 

of HHS will make the final decision, taking into account the NIOSH evaluation, the advice of the 

Board, and the proposed decision issued by NIOSH. As part of this decision process, petitioners may 

seek a review of certain types of final decisions issued by the Secretary of HHS.

3

3.0 SEC-00221, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Class 

Definitions 

The following subsections address the evolution of the class definition for SEC-00221, Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). When a petition is submitted, the requested class definition 

is reviewed as submitted. Based on its review of the available site information and data, NIOSH will 

make a determination whether to qualify for full evaluation all, some, or no part of the petitionerrequested class. If some portion of the petitioner-requested class is qualified, NIOSH will specify that 

class along with a justification for any modification of the petitioner’s class. After a full evaluation of 

the qualified class, NIOSH will determine whether to propose a class for addition to the SEC and will 

specify that proposed class definition. 

3.1 Petitioner-Requested Class Definition and Basis

Petition SEC-00221 was received on October 7, 2014, and qualified on January 6, 2015. The 

petitioner requested that NIOSH consider the following class: All DOE or DOE contractor employees 

who worked in any area at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory within the 7000 East Avenue 

location in Livermore, California, or within the Site 300 location in Tracy, California, from January 

1, 1975 through October 28, 2014. 

 

3 See 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 for a full description of the procedures summarized here. Additional internal procedures are 

available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

11 of 69 

The petitioner provided information and affidavit statements in support of the petitioner’s belief that 

accurate dose reconstruction over time is impossible for the LLNL workers in question. Subsequent 

NIOSH reviews indicate that information presently available to NIOSH does not provide evidence 

that the gross alpha bioassay measurements, upon which some coworker analyses are based, include 

all potential exposure scenarios of concern. Consequently, NIOSH determined that an evaluation is 

warranted into the adequacy of the gross-alpha-based coworker dose methods of ORAUT-TKBS0035-5. NIOSH deemed the need for further research of LLNL gross-alpha monitoring practices 

sufficient to qualify SEC-00221 for evaluation. 

Based on its LLNL research and data capture efforts, NIOSH determined that it has access to internal 

and external dosimetry programs and evaluations, monitoring summary reports, annual environmental 

reports, reviews and assessments of LLNL, evaluations of specific buildings, site surveys, and facility 

and process descriptions for LLNL workers during the time period under evaluation. However, 

NIOSH also determined that site monitoring practices were not sufficiently understood for all time 

periods or for all radionuclides. NIOSH concluded that there is sufficient documentation to support, 

for at least part of the requested time period, the petition basis that internal radiation exposures and 

radiation doses were not adequately monitored at LLNL, either through personal monitoring or area 

monitoring. The information and statements provided by the petitioner, and the subsequent NIOSH 

review of existing documentation and dose reconstruction methods, qualified the petition for further 

consideration by NIOSH, the Board, and HHS. The details of the petition basis are addressed in 

Section 7.4. 

3.2 Class Evaluated by NIOSH

Based on its preliminary research, NIOSH modified the petitioner-requested class to include the 

period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1995. As stated above, information available to 

NIOSH did not provide evidence that the gross alpha bioassay measurements, upon which some 

coworker analyses are based, include all potential exposure scenarios of concern. NIOSH noted that 

gross alpha urine monitoring of transuranic exposures in Building 251 warranted evaluation, including 

neptunium exposures through 1995. The periods of gross-alpha-related exposures for which NIOSH 

qualified the petition did not align with the petitioner-proposed dates of January 1, 1975 through 

October 28, 2014. To coincide with the existing LLNL SEC-00163 class which ends on December 

31, 1973, and with periods of transuranic exposures of concern through 1995, NIOSH modified the 

dates of the class qualifying for evaluation to be January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1995. 

Therefore, NIOSH qualified the following class for further evaluation: All employees of the 

Department of Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its contractors and subcontractors who worked in 

any area at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period 

from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1995. 

During its evaluation of the qualified period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1995, 

NIOSH determined that U-233 exposures in Building 251 were inadequately monitored by the site’s 

gross alpha in vitro sampling program through December 31, 1989. NIOSH review of material 

inventory records indicates that U-233 was refined into end products in Building 251 through at least 

1988. In 1989, the frequency and nature of U-233 transfers changed indicating a possible change in 

U-233 production or usage. Pending further evaluation, NIOSH recommends an end date of 

December 31, 1989, for the SEC class recommended in this report. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

12 of 69 

To allow NIOSH, the Board, and HHS to complete, without delay, their consideration of the Building 

251-related class for whom NIOSH has already determined a dose reconstruction cannot be 

completed, this evaluation report evaluates only the U-233 exposures in Building 251 during the 

period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. For the purposes of timeliness, NIOSH is 

issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date, but will 

continue to review and evaluate internal and external exposures other than U-233 from 1974–1989, 

and all internal and external exposures from 1990–1995. 

3.3 NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC

Based on its current research of the class under evaluation, NIOSH has defined a single class of 

employees for which NIOSH cannot estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy. The NIOSHproposed class to be added to the SEC includes all employees of the Department of Energy, its 

predecessor agencies, and its contractors and subcontractors who worked in any area at the Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period from January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1989, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring 

either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters 

established for one or more other classes of employees in the SEC. Further NIOSH review and 

assessment will be necessary to fully complete the evaluation of all internal and external exposures 

during the period of the proposed class, and during the remaining qualified period of January 1, 1990 

through December 31, 1995.

4.0 Data Sources Reviewed by NIOSH to Evaluate the Class

As is standard practice, NIOSH completed an extensive database and Internet search for information 

regarding Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The database search included the Department of 

Energy (DOE) Legacy Management Considered Sites database, the DOE Office of Scientific and 

Technical Information (OSTI) database, the Energy Citations database, and the Hanford Declassified 

Document Retrieval System. In addition to general Internet searches, the NIOSH Internet search 

included OSTI OpenNet Advanced searches, OSTI Information Bridge Fielded searches, Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC) Agency-wide Documents Access and Management (ADAMS) web 

searches, the DOE Office of Human Radiation Experiments website, and the DOE-National Nuclear 

Security Administration-Nevada Site Office-search. Attachment One contains a summary of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory documents. The summary specifically identifies data 

capture details and general descriptions of the documents retrieved.

In addition to the database and Internet searches listed above, NIOSH identified and reviewed 

numerous data sources to determine information relevant to determining the feasibility of dose 

reconstruction for the class of employees under evaluation. This included determining the availability 

of information on personal monitoring, area monitoring, industrial processes, and radiation source 

materials. The following subsections summarize the data sources identified and reviewed by NIOSH. 

4.1 Site Profile Technical Basis Documents (TBDs) 

A Site Profile provides specific information concerning the documentation of historical practices at 

the specified site. Dose reconstructors can use the Site Profile to evaluate internal and external 

dosimetry data for monitored and unmonitored workers, and to supplement, or substitute for, 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

13 of 69 

individual monitoring data. A Site Profile consists of an Introduction and five Technical Basis 

Documents (TBDs) that provide process history information, information on personal and area 

monitoring, radiation source descriptions, and references to primary documents relevant to the 

radiological operations at the site. The Site Profile for a small site may consist of a single document. 

As part of NIOSH’s evaluation detailed herein, it examined the following TBDs for insights into 

LLNL operations or related topics/operations at other sites: 

• TBD for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Introduction, ORAUT-TKBS-0035-1; Rev. 

00; effective July 18, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 22272 

• TBD for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Site Description, ORAUT-TKBS-0035-2; 

Rev. 00; effective July 29, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 19554 

• TBD for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational Medical Dose, ORAUTTKBS-0035-3; Rev. 01; effective August 27, 2010; SRDB Ref ID: 86394 

• TBD for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational Environmental Dose, 

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-4; Rev. 01; effective March 16, 2010; SRDB Ref ID: 79861 

• TBD for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational Internal Dose, ORAUTTKBS-0035-5; Rev. 02; effective December 13, 2010; SRDB Ref ID: 90961 

• TBD for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational External Dose, ORAUTTKBS-0035-6; Rev. 02; February 26, 2010; SRDB Ref ID: 79425 

4.2 ORAU Technical Information Bulletins (OTIBs) 

An ORAU Technical Information Bulletin (OTIB) is a general working document that provides 

guidance for preparing dose reconstructions at particular sites or categories of sites. NIOSH reviewed 

the following OTIBs as part of its evaluation: 

• OTIB: Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray Procedures, ORAUTOTIB-0006, Rev. 04; June 20, 2011; SRDB Ref ID: 98147

• OTIB: Guidance on Assigning Occupational X-Ray Dose Under EEOICPA for X-Rays 

Administered Off Site, ORAUT-OTIB-0079, Rev. 00; January 3, 2011; SRDB Ref ID: 89563

4.3 Facility Employees and Experts

Numerous interviews were performed with past and present LLNL employees and contractors during 

calendar year 2015. Formal personnel interviews were conducted during the weeks of January 26th, 

February 23rd, April 27th, and September 14th. Additional discussions were held with LLNL’s 

radiation protection staff, including the internal and external dosimetry program leads, during other 

site visits. A total of ten week-long site visits were made between January and December of 2015.

Initially, potential interviewees were identified through discussions with program leads at LLNL. As 

the interviews progressed, additional personnel identified by the interviewees were interviewed during 

subsequent site visits. Potential crafts and trades worker interviewees were identified through the 

assistance of local labor organizations. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

14 of 69 

LLNL groups and programs represented by the individuals interviewed by NIOSH include: 

• Crafts and trades workers

• Engineering 

• Global Security (including the former Z Division)

• Hazardous Waste Management

• Laser Programs

• Material Control and Accountability (MC&A)

• Nuclear Chemistry

• Radiation Protection

• Weapons, Control and Integration 

The interviews with crafts and trades workers include both LLNL staff and outside contractors. The 

Society of Professional Scientists and Engineers – University Professional and Technical Employees 

Local 11 assisted NIOSH in identifying individuals willing to be interviewed. In all, interviews were 

conducted with fourteen crafts and trades workers, representing the following job positions: 

• Electricians

• Health and safety technicians

• Machinists

• Maintenance workers

• Mechanical technicians

• Sheet metal workers

• Waste management technicians

• Welders

All of the formal interviews were conducted in a classified setting to allow for unrestricted 

discussions. For the purposes of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data 

sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date, but will continue to review and evaluate internal and 

external exposures for the period January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1995. Such continued 

evaluation may include additional interviews with facility employees and experts, and will be 

documented in subsequent NIOSH reports. 

4.4 Previous Dose Reconstructions

NIOSH reviewed its NIOSH DCAS Claims Tracking System (referred to as NOCTS) to locate

EEOICPA-related dose reconstructions that might provide information relevant to the petition 

evaluation. Table 4-1 summarizes the results of this review. (NOCTS data available as of February 3, 

2016) 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

15 of 69 

Table 4-1: No. of LLNL Claims Submitted Under the Dose Reconstruction Rule

Description Totals

Total number of claims submitted for dose reconstruction 1047

Total number of claims submitted for energy employees who worked during the period under evaluation 

(January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989) 830

Number of dose reconstructions completed for energy employees who worked during the period under 

evaluation (i.e., the number of such claims completed by NIOSH and submitted to the Department of 

Labor for final approval)

628

Number of claims for which internal dosimetry records were obtained for the period under evaluation 

(January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989) 387

Number of claims for which external dosimetry records were obtained for the period under evaluation 

(January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989) 757

NIOSH reviewed each claim to determine whether internal and/or external personal monitoring 

records could be obtained for the employee. This evaluation report evaluates only the exposures in 

Building 251 during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. For the purposes 

of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility 

conclusions to date, but will continue to review and evaluate reserved internal and external exposures 

from 1974–1989, and all internal and external exposures from 1990–1995. The claim data for the 

entire period that qualified for evaluation (January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1995) will be 

reassessed in subsequent NIOSH reports. 

4.5 NIOSH Site Research Database

NIOSH also examined its Site Research Database (SRDB) to locate documents supporting the 

assessment of the evaluated class. Five thousand, three hundred and seventy-eight documents in this 

database were identified as pertaining to LLNL. These documents were evaluated for their relevance 

to this petition. The documents include historical background on internal and external dosimetry 

programs and evaluations, monitoring summary reports, annual environmental reports, reviews and 

assessments of LLNL, evaluations of specific buildings, site surveys, and facility and process 

descriptions. 

4.6 Other Technical Sources

To support dose reconstruction and SEC evaluations, NIOSH has obtained approximately 35,000 

laboratory-reported bioassay results in electronic format (NIOSH, 2007). These data were supplied by 

LLNL via the Maintaining and Preparing Executive Reports (MAPPER) database, a data storage 

system developed for LLNL by the Sperry Corporation. The LLNL MAPPER database contains only 

in vitro monitoring data, primarily from urinalyses analyzed for uranium (U), plutonium (Pu), gross 

alpha, gross beta, gross gamma, and mixed fission products. 

NIOSH has found that the MAPPER data do not include any in vivo analysis results. NIOSH has 

however captured and evaluated logbooks for two whole-body counter systems used at LLNL 

(NIOSH, 2007). The information available within these logbooks is of very limited use for dose 

reconstruction purposes, particularly for the 1975–1989 time frame and U-233 doses. By the early 

1970s, the logbooks only recorded the number of people counted on a particular date and much of the 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

16 of 69 

other available information dealt with machine setup, calibration, and experimentation. Further 

discussion on the infeasibility of dose reconstruction using available in vivo data is provided in 

subsection 7.2.1.2 of this report. 

4.7 Documentation and/or Affidavits Provided by Petitioners

In qualifying and evaluating the petition, NIOSH reviewed the following documents submitted by the 

petitioners:

• Form B for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; received October 7, 2014; DSA Ref ID: 

120316

• Employee Verification; received October 15, 2014; DSA Ref ID: 120341 

• Initial Comments on Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site Profile; Tri-Valley CAREs; 

correspondence dated April 17, 2006; DSA Ref ID: 120360, PDF pp. 1-6

• Input on the Site Profile for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Society of Professionals, 

Scientists, and Engineers Affiliated with University Professional and Technical Employees 

(UPTE), Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 9119, AFL-CIP; correspondence 

dated April 20, 2006; DSA Ref ID: 120360, PDF pp. 7-10

• Independent Oversight Review of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Radiological 

Controls Activity-Level Implementation; Department of Energy; August 2014; DSA Ref ID: 

120361

• Appendix A-D of Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report for 

Continued Operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National 

Laboratory; Department of Energy; 1992; DSA Ref ID: 120368

• Select Pages from a Global Security Newsletter regarding Environmental Compliance; received 

October 27, 2014; DSA Ref ID: 120369

• Action Plan to Correct Deficiencies Identified by the DOE Tiger Team Assessment of Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory, June 1990, and by Self-Assessment; LLNL and Department of 

Energy; October 5, 1990; DSA Ref IDs: 120476, 120477, 120479 

5.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Class Evaluated by 

NIOSH

The following subsections summarize both radiological operations at LLNL from January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1989, and the information available to NIOSH to characterize particular 

processes and radioactive source materials, as it relates to Building 251. NIOSH will continue to 

review and evaluate the entire LLNL site for the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 

1995, and will proceed with issuing another evaluation report. The information included within this 

evaluation report is intended only to be a summary of the available information relating to U-233 

exposures in Building 251 and is not intended to discuss the entire LLNL site history. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

17 of 69 

5.1 LLNL Plant and Process Descriptions 

LLNL is a multi-program laboratory operated for the DOE. LLNL was formally established in 1952, 

approximately 40 miles east of San Francisco, in southern Alameda County, California. The Atomic 

Energy Commission (AEC) began using the property as a weapons design and physics research 

laboratory, originally known as the University of California Radiation Laboratory at Livermore. The 

site was a branch of the University of California-Berkeley’s radiation laboratory. It later became 

known as the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory at Livermore. LLNL is comprised of two sites: (1) the 

1.5-square-mile Main Laboratory Site located at 7000 East Avenue in Livermore, California, 

previously known as Site 200; and (2) the nearly 11-square-mile Explosive Test Site, also known as 

Site 300, located 15 miles southeast of Livermore, near Tracy, California. Figure 5-1 shows a map of 

the LLNL area, including the Main Laboratory and Site 300. 

Source: SRDB DOE, 2005 PDF p. 71

Figure 5-1: Map of LLNL Site

The original mission at LLNL was thermonuclear weapons development. By 1957, the mission was 

expanded to include diverse scientific and engineering research activities. The current LLNL mission

is to serve as a national resource of scientific, technical, and engineering capability with a special 

focus on national security. This mission includes research and development, strategic defense, arms 

control and treaty verification technology, energy, the environment, biomedicine, the economy, and 

education. Past research activities have included development and testing of the nuclear weapons 

lifecycle, strategic defense research, development of arms control and treaty verification technology, 

fusion research, atomic vapor laser isotope separation (AVLIS) for defense and commercial 

applications, magnetic fusion, energy research in basic energy sciences, atmospheric sciences, fossil 

energy, and commercial nuclear waste (NIOSH, 2007 PDF p. 9 ). However, for the purposes of 

timeliness, NIOSH has narrowed the scope of the current evaluation and is issuing this report focusing 

on available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions as related to Building 251 for the period from 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

18 of 69 

January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. NIOSH will continue to review and evaluate the entire 

LLNL site for the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1995, and will proceed with 

issuing another evaluation report. This evaluation report is not intended to discuss the entire LLNL 

site history. 

For the period 1974–1995, the LLNL workforce consisted of more than 8,000 workers (LLNL, 2005 

PDF p. 4). The main LLNL laboratory site covered 821 acres, of which approximately 640 acres were 

developed, and included approximately 500 buildings and structures. Around 50 of the operational 

buildings contained radiological materials areas. Table 5-1 provides a brief description of the Main 

Laboratory site buildings and activities. In 1966, building numbers were changed; some of these 

changes are cross-referenced in the table.

Table 5-1: Main Laboratory Site Building Numbers

Old Building 

Numbers

Current Building 

Numbers Description

101, 102, 106, 117, 

118, 147, 176, 192

221, 222, 223, 224, 

232, 233, 234, 167, 

168, 169

Chemistry: Various radioactive materials, including cobalt-60, fission 

products, enriched uranium, depleted uranium, natural uranium, U-233, 

Cm-244, Pu-239, Am-241, and others

153, 154, 157, 173, 

180, 194

171, 173, 174, 175, 

176, 177, 194, 210, 

212, 241, 243, 421, 

435

Physics: Accelerators, various activation products, H-3, and others

103, 114, 125, 127, 

174, 175

215, 243, 253, 321, 

419, 514 Lab services: Various radioactive materials

110 261 Critical Test Facility

115 327 Radiography

121 412 Hot cells: High beta waste, strontium-90

170 131 Weapons Engineering

171 332 Metallurgical Chemistry: Also known as Plutonium Facility

172 331 Gaseous Chemistry: Also known as Tritium Facility

182 162, 165, 166 Laboratory Services: 55 Ci Cobalt-60 (1958)

190 251 Chemistry Heavy Elements Facility: Cm-244, Am-241, U-233, Pu-239, 

and others

193 281 Livermore Pool Type Reactor (LPTR)

Source: Table is a modified version of Table 2-1 from ORAUT-TKBS-0035-2. 

LLNL’s Explosive Test Site, known as Site 300, was an experimental, non-nuclear explosive test 

facility created to support LLNL’s missions. Site 300 included approximately 200 buildings and 

structures including 5 underground, reinforced-concrete bunkers equipped with high-speed cameras, 

electrical data-acquisition systems, and one bunker with flash X-ray (LLNL, Apr1981 PDF p. 8). Site 

300 served as a location to: (1) manufacture and assemble explosive parts for explosive and 

environmental testing, and (2) conduct both destructive and non-destructive testing of these explosive 

components. Site 300 activities included: test firing high-explosive materials; surrogate nuclear 

detonations; physical testing such as vibration and shock testing for devices and hardware; 

environmental tests such as heat, cold, and long-term-storage tests; and radiography testing using 

accelerators and radiation sources. 

In 1966, Site 300 buildings changed from the 300 series to the 800 series (e.g., 301 changed to 801) 

(ORAUT-TKBS-0035-2). Table 5-2 provides a general description of the buildings and activities at 

Site 300 (identifying buildings as 800 series). 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

19 of 69

Table 5-2: Site 300 Building Numbers 

Site 300 Facility 

Building Numbers Description

801-East Firing Area Flash X-ray (FXR) Linear Accelerator and Contained Firing Facility (CFF)

804 Low-Level Waste Staging Area

805, 806 A&B, 807, 

827D, and 828 High Explosive Assembly/Machining: Explosives and metal machining

809 Radiographic inspection, High Explosive Pressing Facility

810 Explosives assembly and disassembly

812 Explosives Test Facility 

816 Explosives Waste Storage Facility

817 Isostatic high-explosive pressing

823 Radiographic inspection: Portable 9-MV Varian accelerator

825 High Explosive Chemistry: 100 ton press used to form billets of uniform density

826 High Explosive Chemistry: Small-scale mixing and blending

827 High Explosive Chemistry: Large-scale mixing, extrusion, and pressing; synthesis work; and 

testing and gas extraction

829 Energetic Materials Processing Center

830 Physical properties and thermal aging

831 Long-term thermal aging: Thermal testing of weapons components since the 1950s

832 Complex-Weapons 

Testing

Tension, compression, thermal expansion, and creep testing: Thermal testing of weapons 

components since the 1950s

833-Weapons Testing Physical tests of high explosives including compressive, tensile, thermal expansion, thermal 

conductivity, creep, and diffusivity testing

834 Complex-Weapons 

Testing Thermal environmental testing: Thermal testing of weapons components since the 1950s

836 Complex-Weapons 

Testing

Dynamic testing. Multiple actuator hydraulic shaker for high force, high amplitude, lowfrequency shock and vibration testing

838 Long-term thermal and pressure effects: Thermal testing of weapons components since the 

1950s

840 Enclosed small-scale, high-explosive firings

845 High-explosive experiments occurred at this firing table from 1958 to 1963 

850-West Firing Area Firing bunker for high-explosive testing: Over 95% of the tritium used at Site 300 was 

expended at the Building 850 firing table

851-West Firing Area Firing bunker for high-explosive testing, with 100-MeV LINAC

854-West Firing Area Dynamic Test Complex: Facilities for shock and vibration testing of systems, components,

and assemblies

855 Remote machining and disassembly

857 Thermal aging

858 Drop tower for testing specimens for effects of various impacts

865-East Firing Area Advanced Test Accelerator

Source: Information for this table comes from LLNL, Apr1981 and LLNL, Jan1985

LLNL may be best known for the wide array of strategic defense work in the area of nuclear weapon 

systems performed by the laboratory staff. This work included weapons-systems research and design, 

as well as nuclear weapons manufacturing and assembly. LLNL workers have handled a variety of 

radionuclides as part of their routine work. However, as mentioned previously, this report will focus 

on Building 251 facilities and U-233 during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 

1989.

5.1.1 Building 251

Building 251, the Heavy Element Facility, was a major facility for supporting the U.S. nuclear testing 

program and for basic research. The steel-framed, concrete block and masonry industrial building is 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

20 of 69 

approximately 35,680 square feet (DOE, 1992 PDF p. 27) and is located in the western portion of the 

main site. It is a one-story building with a mezzanine over the high-bay portion of the building in 

Increment 7. The building (previously designated as Building 190) was built in eight “increments” 

between 1955 and 1981. While it is shown in facility documents as one building, it is actually eight 

individual buildings, abutted together and joined by doorways. The first two “increments” built were 

designed as a radiochemical laboratory to provide support for nuclear testing at the Pacific Proving 

Ground. As the nuclear testing program’s needs increased, additional increments were added

(Sullivan, 2002). Per the 1980 SAN Review of Building 251 Operations at Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory report, approximately 11 individuals worked full time in the Building 251 

facility, with a peak maximum occupancy of 30 individuals (Keheley, 1980 PDF p. 12). 

In its final state prior to decommissioning, the building contained twenty-three laboratories, seven 

offices, seven mechanical equipment rooms, four storage rooms, five industrial shops, two conference 

rooms, four hot cells, a pool source storage room, and two change rooms. There were also hallways, 

janitorial closets, and restrooms (Sullivan, 2002 PDF p. 33), underground storage vaults, hot cells, and 

the FRED Isotope Separator. The building’s pool storage facility (15’x 6’) was in room 1165 and was 

normally filled to a depth of 10 feet. It served as a water-shielded radioactive material storage facility 

with a continuous water monitor and a calorimeter tank. It also permitted underwater packaging of 

high-level gamma and neutron emitters. Building 251 also had six storage pits, located at the north 

end of Room 1165. They were designed to provide shielded storage of radioactive materials. There 

were an additional 12 storage pits in Room 1320, a Mosler safe for storage of samples sealed in metal 

cans in room 1235, and the grey cabinet storage in room 1117 (LLL, 1980 PDF pp. 45-47). The entire 

roof of Building 251 was replaced between 1983 and 1986 (Sullivan, 2002). Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-

3 show floorplans of the building and the mezzanine. 

Source: Sullivan, 2002 PDF p. 34

Figure 5-2: Building 251, Floor Plan, First Floor
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

21 of 69 

Source: Sullivan, 2002 PDF p. 34

Figure 5-3: Building 251, Floor Plan, Mezzanine

The work in Building 251 involved three main tasks under the nuclear testing program: (1) nuclear 

tracer fabrication, (2) radiochemical analysis of bomb debris, and (3) chemical research into 

transuranic radionuclides. Facility operations included preparing radioactive source and heavyelement tracers in support of underground testing, isotopic preparation experiments, high-specificactivity sample processing, fission cross-section experiments, radioactive gas transfer, and theoretical 

and applied research involving transuranic materials (Keheley, 1980 PDF p. 5). Separations on postshot samples were also performed in Building 251, after initial sample processing at Building 151. 

Building 251 housed specialized equipment designed by in-house researchers specifically for 

manufacturing tracer sets. Most of the tracer sets used in the U.S. nuclear testing program were 

manufactured in Building 251 (Sullivan, 2002).

Room 1235 of Building 251 contained the uranium tracer line, used to fabricate tracer sets containing 

U-233 and U-235. The tracer fabrication process included pressing oxide powders into pellets and 

then soldering them into brass containers (Gray, 2006).

Basic research involving transplutonic materials, including rare isotopes, was also performed in 

Building 251. Work in the facility involved numerous exotic isotopes, notably those of curium (Cm) 

and americium (Am). For curium, the building inventory included Cm-243, Cm-244, Cm-246, and 

Cm-248. Am-241, Am-243, and Am-242m were also present. NIOSH has indications that Cm-242 

was also included in the bioassay program for Building 251. As an indication of how rare some of 

these isotopes are, only a few milligrams of Am-242m had ever been purified. Work in Building 251 

also involved isotopes of californium (Cf-249 and Cf-252) and berkelium, and other higher actinides 

such as einsteinium. Pure forms of Pu-238 and Pu-242 were routinely used, and weapons-grade 

plutonium was also present (Gray, 2006 PDF p. 13). 

Building 251 had two separate and independent ventilation systems to prevent the release of 

radioactivity into the environment: (1) a High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA)-filtered glove box 

and enclosure exhaust system and (2) a room-exhaust system (Sullivan, 2002 PDF p. 32). 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

22 of 69

At the time of its decommissioning, Building 251 contained 49 glove boxes. Forty of these were of 

the freestanding variety, primarily the “Berkeley” style with a single pair of gloves providing access to 

the interior of the box (Gray, 2006 PDF p. 27). The remaining nine were “blue cave” enclosures, 

which were glove boxes surrounded by an external shield. All of the glove boxes and caves had 

HEPA-filtered exhausts. 

Building 251 had a radiation safety program that included As Low as Reasonably Achievable 

(ALARA) goals. There was a plan for radiation surveys and monitoring to occur any time radioactive 

material was moved within the building or equipment was removed from the building beyond the 

routine building radiation survey program. Air monitoring was performed in the building including 

air sampling, stack monitoring by 45 roof-stack isokinetic samplers, and CAMs (LLNL, Jun1985 PDF 

p. 4). To prevent any release of radioactive material in the event of a fire or other disaster, Building 

251 was surrounded by a drainage system popularly referred to as the moat, which captured liquid 

waste and diverted it to an underground retention sump. Building 251 also had a nuclear criticality 

alarm and a fire alarm.

In 1992, the United States ended its underground nuclear testing program and Building 251 lost its 

principal mission. A decision was made in 1993 to cease programmatic operations in Building 251 

(Gray, 2006), and the facility was placed in a standby mode in 1995 (Sullivan, 2002). The facility 

transitioned to storage mode in September of 2001. At that time a risk reduction program was 

initiated to remove contaminated glove boxes and the radioactive material inventory from the facility. 

In 2005, the facility’s classification was reduced from DOE Category II Nonreactor Nuclear Facility 

to Radiological Facility (Gray, 2006).

5.1.2 Building 251 Access Control

At the time of its decommissioning, Building 251 was surrounded by security fencing with access 

controlled by a Controlled Access by Individual Number (CAIN) booth. The CAIN booth limited 

entry to LLNL-badged personnel or those under escort (e.g., outside contractors). This is the system 

currently used for nearly all of the facilities in the limited area within the LLNL main campus. It is 

unclear how long this particular system of access control has been in place at LLNL, but given its 

mission, access to Building 251 has always been controlled in some manner. A health physics 

logbook for Buildings 151 and 251 makes reference to the Building 251 CAIN system in an entry 

dated March 28, 1980 (LLNL, 1980-1981 PDF p. 9), so the CAIN system was in place at least as of 

then. The log entry implies that the Building 251 CAIN system required pre-enrollment for access, 

but the same reference makes it clear that construction workers, electricians, and site visitors were 

routinely present in the building during that time.

LLNL machinists interviewed by NIOSH indicated that access controls were less stringent during the 

1970s and it was more common for them to work in different facilities across the site. Researchers 

and support staff routinely went back and forth between Building 151 and Building 251 while the 

latter was in operation. A health physics logbook for Buildings 151 and 251 from 1980 (LLNL, 1980-

1981) describes personnel contamination events in Building 251 involving an [Job Title Redacted per 

Privacy Act] on [Date Redacted per Privacy Act] (LLNL, 1980-1981 PDF p. 16) and a [Job Title 

Redacted per Privacy Act]on [Date Redacted per Privacy Act] (LLNL, 1980-1981 PDF p. 27). The 

[Job Title Redacted per Privacy Act] received contamination while “crawling on top of [Redacted per 

Privacy Act].” The [Job Title Redacted per Privacy Act] received [Redacted per Privacy Act]

contamination. An entry dated April 17, 1980, also makes reference to the north door of Building 251 

being wedged open while construction was going on in the building (LLNL, 1980-1981 PDF p.12). 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

23 of 69 

An entry dated November 12, 1980, in the same logbook indicates that visitors to Building 151 were 

going over to Building 251 without wearing dosimeters (LLNL, 1980-1981 PDF p. 36). NIOSH has 

found no comprehensive records documenting access to Building 251 for site visitors, or for workers 

that may have spent considerable time in Building 251, but were permanently assigned to other 

buildings (such as Building 151).

LLNL staff were asked about the existence of historical access control records during the numerous 

interviews performed by NIOSH, but no actionable information was obtained. NIOSH has been

unable to determine if such records existed, were retained, or were sufficiently detailed as to allow 

explicit determination of who was or was not in a given facility at a given time. During its numerous 

site visits it did not appear to NIOSH that the CAIN-based access control system would provide 

information having that level of detail. NIOSH has no information as to whether a different system 

may have been in place prior to 1980. 

NIOSH has determined that information currently available contains insufficient access control 

information or records for Building 251, and insufficient general site worker movement data, to 

accurately assess whether an energy employee, or class of employees, did or did not potentially enter 

Building 251 during the period under evaluation in this report. 

5.2 Radiological Exposure Sources from LLNL Operations in Building 251

Workers at LLNL were exposed to radiation from a variety of radioactive materials and radiationproducing machines. The potential for both internal and external radiation exposure existed in all 

buildings where radioactive materials were handled or stored. Workers in specific buildings had the 

potential for internal exposure to uranium and plutonium isotopes, tritium, fission products, and other 

exotic isotopes consistent with the programs and investigations conducted in those buildings. The 

sources of external exposure included beta, gamma, and neutron radiation. However, this report will 

focus on U-233 in Building 251. 

Workers were monitored for external radiation exposure, categorized as whole body (WB), skin, or 

extremity dose according to applicable DOE and site specific guidance at the time. Programs to 

monitor for internal exposure were established with the Hazards Control organization, as determined 

specific to the identified potential for such exposures. Reviews of potential workplace radiological 

hazards in LLNL facilities were often performed. Each facility had radiological safety plans that 

prescribed workplace radiological monitoring and assessments. 

The following subsections provide an overview of the internal and external exposure sources for the 

Building 251 workers during the 1974–1989 period under evaluation in this report. 

5.2.1 Internal Radiological Exposure Sources from LLNL Building 251 Operations

Many of the radioactive substances handled at LLNL were alpha particle emitters. Prevention of 

internal exposures to alpha emitters was recognized as a significant radiological hazard protection 

challenge.

LLNL workers were potentially exposed to uranium, thorium, highly enriched uranium (HEU), 

plutonium, americium, curium, neptunium, and other exotic materials in Building 251, the Heavy 

Elements Facility. As described previously, the Heavy Element Facility work involved nuclear tracer 

fabrication, radiochemical analysis of bomb debris, and chemical research into transuranic 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

24 of 69 

radionuclides, including work with high-specific-activity sample processing and theoretical and 

applied research involving transuranics (Keheley, 1980 PDF p. 5). 

During its evaluation of transuranic exposures, NIOSH identified the potential for inadequately 

monitored internal exposures to U-233. Exposures to U-233 in Building 251 will be the focus of the 

discussion of internal exposure sources below. Workers in Building 251, where operations involving 

U-233 were known to have occurred almost exclusively, would have potential exposure to this heavy 

element. Exposure to U-233 entails alpha emissions as an internal dose concern, and gamma radiation 

associated with the decomposition daughter products, primarily from any impurities. 

Review of MC&A records at LLNL indicate to NIOSH that U-233 was refined into end products in 

Building 251 through at least 1988. Transfers of U-233 between Building 251 and the central storage 

vault at Building 332 continued beyond 1988, but as of 1989 the records indicate a change in the 

frequency and nature of those transfers. Pending further NIOSH evaluation of post-1989 U-233 

operations, this report focuses on U-233 operations in Building 251 during the period January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1989. 

LLNL received U-233 metal and oxide from Rocky Flats Plant for use in tracer applications 

(Karlsson, 1977). Inventory documents imply U-233 was also received from Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory. The U-233 exposure potential existed at Building 251, the Heavy Elements Facility 

during the 1974–1989 period under evaluation in this report. Work in Building 251 required facilities 

that could accommodate work with high levels of alpha and gamma radioactivity; the building was 

designed and used primarily as a facility for safe handling, processing, and storing transuranic 

elements and U-233. Tracer sets were fabricated for all nuclear tests overseen by LLNL, and for 

select sets of nuclear tests conducted and overseen by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). 

These bomb fraction tracer sets were used to help determine fission and fusion yields in the post-shot 

analysis of bomb debris. Bomb fraction tracers were capsules filled with a radioactive isotope that 

was not produced by the explosion. LLNL fabricated these tracer sets in Building 251. 

Surveys, air samples, and bioassay samples via gross alpha analysis were routinely performed in 

Building 251, as indicated by many documents including the Radiation Safety Program documents 

and the Health Physics Discipline Action Plans for the building. The LLNL gross alpha technique 

does not differentiate among the alpha-emitting isotopes. 

5.2.2 External Radiological Exposure Sources from LLNL Building 251 Operations

The potential for external radiation dose existed at all locations where radioactive materials were 

handled or stored, where materials were tested by explosive or radiographic means, and from 

exposures resulting from accelerators, nuclear reactors, and cyclotrons at LLNL and Site 300. The 

radiation fields at LLNL are highly variable and radiation sources included a wide variety of 

radioactive materials and radiation-producing machines such as electron accelerators, X-ray machines, 

cyclotrons, neutron generators, and a research nuclear reactor. NIOSH has documentation of reviews 

of potential workplace hazards in LLNL facilities that summarize potential radiation hazards in the 

respective facilities. Table 2-2 in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-2 summarizes building activities and 

radionuclides that workers could have encountered. Sources of potential external exposures included 

primarily beta and photon radiations. The beta and photon (X-ray and gamma) energy ranges and 

geometries varied across operations. The potential for exposure to neutrons existed in several 

operations. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

25 of 69

As part of its defense mission, LLNL staff conducted atmospheric (1952-1963) and underground 

(1957-1992) weapons tests at both the Pacific Proving Ground and at the Nevada Test Site. These 

tests were conducted offsite; test planning and preparation were done at LLNL.

Fission products contained in the blast media resulting from test shots at other locations were part of 

the sample materials brought onsite for analysis at Building 251. Radioelements likely to have been 

captured and counted would have included strontium, barium, radium, most of the transition metals 

unless they form strong amine complexes (such as cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, and silver), all the rare 

earths, and all the actinides. This means that beta-emitting progeny of thorium and uranium were 

likely to be included in the gross beta results. 

5.2.2.1 Beta/Photon

External radiation dose at LLNL was evaluated and well understood by the LLNL’s Hazards Control 

organization. Evaluations of potential beta and photon (gamma and X-ray) radiation hazards at LLNL 

facilities have been performed on numerous occasions, as noted in Attachment A, Section A.2 of 

ORAUT- TKBS-0035-6. Table 6-6 of ORAUT- TKBS-0035-6 lists numerous beta/photon radiation 

sources potentially encountered at LLNL over the years, the approximate energy category, and the 

associated dose fraction. 

Building 251 had potential photon energies predominately in the 30-250 keV range, and beta energies 

all within the >15 keV range.

5.2.2.2 Neutron

Evaluations of potential neutron radiation hazards at LLNL facilities have also been performed on 

numerous occasions, as noted in Attachment A, Section A.2 of ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. Table 6-7 of 

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6 lists neutron radiation sources potentially encountered at LLNL over the 

years, the approximate energy category, and the associated dose fraction. Building 251 handled 

curium, californium, and other potential sources of neutrons, especially during transuranic 

radiochemistry experimentation (ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6). Workplace neutron radiation energies of

potential external radiation exposure significance to workers in Building 251 are expected to be 

between 10 keV and 20 MeV. Sources of neutron radiation were normally shielded, during operations 

and when in storage (Inventory, 2004-2005; Gray, 2006).

5.2.3 Incidents

LLNL retains radiological incident records in numerous locations at the site. Evidence of radiological 

incidents was observed in internal monitoring records for individuals known to have worked in 

Building 251. However, these incidents involved radioactive materials other than U-233, and are not 

relevant for this evaluation. Full evaluation of radiological incidents is therefore being reserved for a

future NIOSH evaluation of internal and external exposures for the period from January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1995.
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

26 of 69

6.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Class Evaluated 

by NIOSH

The following subsections provide an overview of the state of the available internal and external 

monitoring data for the LLNL class under evaluation. Though the focus on Building 251 continues in 

the following subsections, some descriptions applicable to the overall LLNL monitoring program and 

resultant data are presented as appropriate. Further details regarding the LLNL Radiation Protection

Program approach, sampling types, various analyses, detection limits, and information on additional 

available data can be found in the various LLNL Site Profile documents (ORAUT-TKBS-0035-1 

through ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6).

NIOSH has identified and reviewed numerous LLNL data sources to determine the availability of 

personnel monitoring, workplace monitoring (discussed below), and radiological source term data. 

Occupational monitoring data for LLNL have historically resided in a number of repositories and 

databases over the years. Data have also been stored in logbooks, as hard copies in personal files, and 

in some cases such as incident data, in facility “building files.”

6.1 Available LLNL Internal Monitoring Data

Throughout the evaluated period, the selection of workers for internal monitoring at LLNL was based 

on the potential for internal exposure. Worker selection for bioassay, whole body, and/or specific 

organ counting was based on recommendations from applicable program supervisors and the health 

physics staff assigned to the work area. Bioassays were commonly supplemented and/or triggered by 

workplace air monitoring (Mansfield, 1989). However, LLNL apparently did not typically use data 

acquired from the air monitoring program to prepare the dose of record for employees; these air data 

are not readily associated with individual exposures. In addition to in vitro monitoring (primarily 

urinalysis) and in vivo monitoring (primarily whole body and lung counting), nasal smears were 

collected after incidents as a means of assessing intake potential.

6.1.1 In Vitro Bioassay (General) 

LLNL maintains its official in vitro bioassay records in the form of hard copies stored in personal 

files. Despite these hard copies being the dose of record, LLNL has also developed and utilized 

various database systems for storing and manipulating occupational in vitro monitoring data. These 

include MAPPER (used until approximately 1995), SYMPHONY (initially used in the latter 1990s), 

and currently uses the Bioassay Laboratory Information Management System (BLIMS) database. 

Other databases used by LLNL’s internal dosimetry group include: (1) Bioassay Information Tracking 

System (BITS) and (2) Dose Assessment Tracking System (DATS). BITS is used for tracking 

investigations, and data within DATS is fed into DOE’s Radiation Exposure Monitoring System 

(REMS) for dose reporting purposes. None of the aforementioned databases contain in vivo (lung or 

whole body) counting results.

Though no longer used by LLNL, in vitro data contained within the MAPPER database span the 

January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989 period. MAPPER has utility for assessing monitoring 

data availability. The MAPPER database contains monitoring data from the early 1960s through ca. 

1995 and is believed to be complete from approximately the mid-1970s forward. NIOSH initially 

obtained a names-redacted version of MAPPER in 2007 to support earlier LLNL SEC evaluations, 

dose reconstruction work, and coworker model development. A “fully identified” version of the 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

27 of 69

database was received in 2015. The MAPPER database contains just over 35,000 records; 

approximately 16,100 records are from within the 1974–1989 evaluation period. Results are 

predominantly for urinalysis (just 354 fecal samples).

A review of site records has shown that routine in vitro monitoring was accomplished through a 

combination of four procedures: (1) gross alpha urinalysis, (2) gross beta urinalysis (also called mixed 

fission product, MFP), (3) plutonium urinalysis, and (4) uranium urinalysis. Querying the entire 

MAPPER database, over 2,300 individuals and 167 locations (largely buildings) can be identified. 

The locations listed, however, are known to not necessarily represent an employee’s potential 

exposure location.

6.1.2 In Vitro Bioassay Results for Building 251

Table 6-1 presents a summary obtained from MAPPER of the number and types of urinalysis results 

that have been associated specifically with Building 251 and the 1974–1989 evaluation period.

Table 6-1: In Vitro Results for Building 251

Analyte Number of 

Urinalysis Results

Number of Fecal

Results

MFP 9 0

U-238 5 0

Alpha 135 6

Am-241 12 7

Beta 79 0

Cm-242 5 0

Cm-244 7 0

Pu-239 134 6

Sm-145 1 0

The available results do not indicate evidence of routine in vitro monitoring for uranium associated 

with Building 251. Though not presented in detail in Table 6-1 above, analysis of the MAPPER 

database reveals only five urinalysis results for uranium associated with Building 251 from 1979–

1989. All five results are from 1980. LLNL used either fluorometric or phosphorescence 

measurements in its uranium urinalysis program. The sample results are therefore all in terms of total 

uranium by mass. Discussed further in Section 7.2.1 of this report, this is problematic relative to 

determining U-233 plus U-232 intakes due to large uncertainties associated with the necessary 

conversion from mass to activity.

6.1.3 In Vivo Bioassay (General)

In vivo monitoring at LLNL was accomplished via whole-body scanning and/or organ counting. As 

with in vitro, selection of workers for monitoring was based on potential exposure as determined by 

appropriate supervisory and health physics personnel. Baseline and termination counts were also 

utilized during the 1979–1989 period. LLNL has no electronic repository for in vivo monitoring data 

precluding efficient, comprehensive summarization of available monitoring records. The “official” in 

vivo records are in the form of hard copies stored in personnel files.

As was the case throughout the industry, in vivo counting systems at LLNL were still evolving rapidly 

and struggling with stability issues through the 1960s and early 1970s. The systems were better 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

28 of 69

developed, calibrated, and stabilized however by 1974 and were generally considered useful for 

monitoring and detecting certain gamma spectra. LLNL dosimetry staff recalled that phoswich 

detectors were used for chest counting from 1975 to approximately 1985, and sodium iodide detectors 

were used in a bed scanner for whole-body counts. The utility of the resultant counting data for 

determining depleted uranium intakes is discussed in Section 7.2 of this report.

Though no efficiently searchable repository for in vivo counting results exists, NIOSH has obtained 

logbooks for two whole-body counter systems used at the site. Logbooks captured include those from 

years 1974–1981, the early portion of the current evaluation time period. Captured logbooks indicate 

that a range of approximately 50–200 in vivo counts were performed at LLNL each year. 

Unfortunately, by 1970 logbook entries became more limited in that they only recorded the number of 

people counted on particular dates and documented information regarding machine set-up, calibration, 

and experimentation.

In addition to reviewing the captured logbooks, a detailed review of in vivo records and worker details 

was performed on received EEOICPA claims stored within the NIOSH claims tracking system 

(NOCTS). The review was limited to all previously identified LLNL claims that were known to 

contain in vivo data for the period 1974–1995. As possible, information such as job title, assignment 

location, and counting dates were extracted. Data were found for whole-body scans, lung scans, 

thyroid counts, and one wound count. It should be noted that it cannot be determined with certainty 

that recorded worker assignment locations correlate with actual exposure potential locations.

6.1.4 In Vivo Bioassay Results for Building 251

Assessment of EEOICPA claims documentation revealed in vivo monitoring results for seven LLNL 

employees with at least some assigned or indicated association with Building 251 from 1974–1995. 

Though some whole-body counts were performed, most of the monitoring was for lung scans as 

would be expected for a Transuranic (TRU) facility. NOCTS in vivo monitoring was found for only 

two workers associated with Building 251 during the 1974–1989 evaluation period. Of these two 

workers, there were seven lung counts, fourteen whole-body counts, and one liver count.

6.1.5 Air Monitoring

LLNL utilized workplace air monitoring in an attempt to identify any increased potential for intakes. 

Bioassays were commonly supplemented and triggered by workplace monitoring (Mansfield, 1989). 

However, LLNL did not typically use data acquired from the air monitoring program to prepare the 

dose of record for employees; available air data are not readily associated with individual exposures 

and are also often difficult to associate with high-risk work areas.

NIOSH has found no evidence of a comprehensive repository for air monitoring data, making 

assessment and summarization of its availability site-wide, or specifically for Building 251 

impossible. Though NIOSH has captured some air monitoring data, very few of the results are from 

within the 1974–1989 evaluation period and/or from Building 251.

NIOSH has, however, captured documents indicating that even if air monitoring data are made 

available for Building 251 they would be deemed insufficient to support dose reconstruction. For 

example, a review of Building 251 operations performed by the DOE San Francisco Operations Office 

in 1980 noted an “excessive” failure rate for the CAMs used in the various laboratories in Building 

251 and recommended that LLNL “vigorously pursue” improving the air monitoring in the building
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

29 of 69

(Keheley, 1980 PDF p. 11). Though slightly after the current evaluation time period, a 1990 DOE 

Tiger Team assessment of LLNL (DOE, 1990) noted that air monitors and air samplers did not appear 

to be strategically placed with respect to capturing representative samples of potential airborne 

releases. This document further noted that breathing zone monitors were not used at LLNL and CAM

placement appeared to emphasize general room air monitoring rather than representative workplace 

monitoring.

6.2 Available LLNL External Monitoring Data

The personal dosimeter is the primary data type used to reconstruct the external doses for LLNL

workers. Those data are specifically used to reconstruct a worker’s measured and missed external 

doses. For the period under evaluation in this report, the LLNL site monitored all workers for external 

photon and beta doses via their own dosimeters. The 1977 Health and Safety Manual for LLNL 

states:

A record of the occupational radiation dose of each LLL employee shall be obtained by means 

of a continuous personnel monitoring program. Normally, non-LLL employees in areas under 

direct Laboratory control shall be monitored in the same manner as LLL employees with the 

exception that deliverymen, visitors, contractors, and other transient personnel are not 

required to wear dosimeters unless they enter buildings where there is a potential for exposure 

to ionizing radiation (LLNL, 1977 PDF p. 11).

The neutron dosimetry is described in a 1980 site memo with the subject “Personnel neutron 

dosimetry at LLNL”:

Personnel neutron dosimetry at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is performed 

using three dosimetry methods: TLD dosimeters, albedo dosimeters, and polycarbonate and 

monocarbonate foils. The TLD and albedo dosimeters contain thermoluminescent crystals of 

lithium. The TLD dosimeters is issued to all employees and allows determination of the 

employees [sic] beta, gamma, x-ray and thermal neutron exposure. ...To assure accurate 

readings, we routinely issue albedo dosimeters to all personnel who may be receiving neutron 

exposure (Hankins, 1980).

NIOSH has obtained copies of the Radiation Safety Programs for various buildings at LLNL. In the 

1985 program for Building 251 are the statements “All employees and visitors at LLNL are issued a 

thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD)” (LLNL Nov1981, PDF p. 113) and “CR-39 track etch neutron 

badges are assigned to workers at Building 251 who work with neutron-emitting radionuclides” 

(LLNL, Nov1981 PDF p. 113).

Certain operational safety procedures required the use of extremity monitoring. For example, the 

safety procedure for U-233 Metal Scrap Recovery in Building 251 (LLNL, Nov1981 PDF pp. 267-

269) described an operation in a glove box involving 21 Ci of U-233 and included the requirement 

“finger ring dosimeters must be worn.”

Specific for Building 251, NIOSH has reports from the site for the period between 1982 and 1990 that 

list monthly, quarterly, or annual totals for individuals who worked in that building. These reports list 

individuals who worked in Building 251 along with their whole-body gamma and neutron exposures 

(LLNL, Jun1985 PDF p. 3; Monitoring, 3rd Quarter 1986; Monitoring, Jul 1982; Monitoring, 2nd

Quarter 1988; Monitoring, 3rd Quarter 1987; Monitoring, 2nd Quarter 1987; Monitoring, 1986;
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

30 of 69 

Monitoring, 1st Quarter 1988; Monitoring, 3rd Quarter 1988; Monitoring, 2nd Quarter 1990 PDF p. 3; 

Gibson, 1983; LLNL, Nov1981 PDF p. 284). Note that some reports (e.g., Monitoring, 1986 PDF p. 

4) state that the exposure for some workers was assigned to Building 151, although the actual 

exposure occurred in Building 251. 

NIOSH does not possess a complete set of the dosimeter data. However, DOE does have a complete 

set and provides the external dosimetry records for each energy employee who files an EEOICPA 

claim.

NIOSH has a copy of the historical LLNL external database, REX. The database contains 2,818,811 

total records with 686,415 records for LLNL employees between 1975 and 1989. Each record has a 

date, name, and one or more dose values for gamma, neutron, skin, and extremity. Although not used 

for dose reconstruction purposes, the database gives an indication of the numbers of people who were 

monitored. There are 16,210 individuals in this database. 

Specifically for Building 251, there are 1,705 records associated with the location “251,” although site 

procedures used either the person’s location or the location of the work interchangeably as the 

location stored the database.

For medical X-ray exposure, NIOSH has descriptions of the program including the type and frequency 

of the required X-rays (DOE, 1987 PDF p. 23; LLNL, 1991) and the types of machines used and their 

settings (Graham, 1975; Myers, 1979). Details regarding the various analyses used and the associated 

minimum detectable activities are presented in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. 

7.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Class Evaluated by 

NIOSH

The feasibility determination for the class of employees under evaluation in this report is governed by 

both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1). Under that Act and rule, NIOSH must establish whether 

or not it has access to sufficient information either to estimate the maximum radiation dose for every 

type of cancer for which radiation doses are reconstructed that could have been incurred under 

plausible circumstances by any member of the class, or to estimate the radiation doses to members of 

the class more precisely than a maximum dose estimate. If NIOSH has access to sufficient 

information for either case, NIOSH would then determine that it would be feasible to conduct dose 

reconstructions. 

In determining feasibility, NIOSH begins by evaluating whether current or completed NIOSH dose 

reconstructions demonstrate the feasibility of estimating with sufficient accuracy the potential 

radiation exposures of the class. If the conclusion is one of infeasibility, NIOSH systematically 

evaluates the sufficiency of different types of monitoring data, process and source or source term data, 

which together or individually might assure that NIOSH can estimate either the maximum doses that 

members of the class might have incurred, or more precise quantities that reflect the variability of 

exposures experienced by groups or individual members of the class. This approach is discussed in 

DCAS’s SEC Petition Evaluation Internal Procedures which are available at 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. The next four major subsections of this Evaluation Report examine:

• The sufficiency and reliability of the available data. (Section 7.1) 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

31 of 69 

• The feasibility of reconstructing internal radiation doses. (Section 7.2) 

• The feasibility of reconstructing external radiation doses. (Section 7.3) 

• The bases for petition SEC-00221 as submitted by the petitioner. (Section 7.4) 

7.1 Pedigree of LLNL Data

This subsection answers questions that need to be asked before performing a feasibility evaluation. 

Data Pedigree addresses the background, history, and origin of the data. It requires looking at site 

methodologies that may have changed over time; primary versus secondary data sources and whether 

they match; and whether data are internally consistent. All these issues form the bedrock of the 

researcher’s confidence and later conclusions about the data’s quality, credibility, reliability, 

representativeness, and sufficiency for determining the feasibility of dose reconstruction. The 

feasibility evaluation presupposes that data pedigree issues have been settled. 

7.1.1 Internal Monitoring Data Pedigree Review

As explained in the following sections, NIOSH has not found internal monitoring data considered 

sufficient to determine potential doses from internal exposures to U-233 in Building 251 for the 1974–

1989 period evaluated in this report. NIOSH considers the U-233-related data available for in vitro, in 

vivo, and air monitoring to each be insufficient in terms of quantity and quality. Available records are, 

however, in the form of hard copies and as such are considered primary data sources. 

Analysis of in vitro data available in MAPPER (Section 6.1 of this report) indicates a focus on 

transuranic material monitoring, but does not provide evidence of routine monitoring for uranium. In 

addition to a resultant insufficient quantity of uranium monitoring results for Building 251, the results 

that are available have unacceptable associated accuracy uncertainties due to the types of analytical 

procedures used and unit conversions required. Neither in vivo nor air monitoring records are stored 

electronically; total availability of these records therefore cannot efficiently be determined. Using 

captured and/or submitted in vivo counting results to determine U-233 intakes involves unacceptable 

uncertainties regarding the presence of gamma emitting decay products (see Section 7.2 of this 

report). Available air monitoring results are judged unrepresentative of immediate working 

environments due to documented sampler placement issues and unacceptably high sampling device 

failure rates (DOE, 1990). 

7.1.2 External Monitoring Data Pedigree Review

Consistent with NIOSH’s previous evaluation of SEC-00163 (NIOSH, 2010), NIOSH has found 

LLNL’s external monitoring data to be of sufficient quality and quantity to represent external doses 

measured for the 1974–1989 period in this report. Doses of record are maintained in hard-copy form 

representing primary data sources. Captured and reviewed LLNL policies, monitoring procedures, 

assessments, and descriptions of monitoring equipment all indicate the presence of a comprehensive 

monitoring program and that the resultant monitoring data are sufficient to adequately assess doses 

from all potential radiation sources incurred by the evaluated class. No data quantity issues have been 

observed during claims processing or otherwise during this SEC evaluation. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

32 of 69

7.2 Evaluation of Bounding Internal Radiation Doses at LLNL

The following subsections address the ability to bound internal doses, methods for bounding doses, 

and the feasibility of internal dose reconstruction for potential intakes of U-233 by workers in 

Building 251 during the period 1974–1989. As presented in Section 5.2.1 above, NIOSH review of 

material inventory records indicates that U-233 was refined into end products in Building 251 through 

at least 1988. In 1989, the frequency and nature of U-233 transfers changed indicating a possible 

change in U-233 production or usage. Pending further NIOSH evaluation of post-1989 U-233 

operations, this report focuses on U-233 operations in Building 251 during the period January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1989. Full evaluation for other internal dose contributors during this period, 

and for all dose contributors during the period 1990–1995, will be performed by NIOSH subsequent 

to this initial evaluation for U-233.

7.2.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process Related Internal Doses

The following subsections summarize the extent and limitations of information available for 

reconstructing the process-related internal doses of members of the class under evaluation.

7.2.1.1 Urinalysis Information and Available Data

Documents defining bioassay assignments for individuals that routinely worked in Building 251 were 

reviewed to identify such individuals by name. The names were then used in queries of the MAPPER 

database to examine their in vitro monitoring history. The MAPPER results did not show evidence of 

routine in vitro monitoring for uranium, though occasional uranium urinalyses are seen for some of 

the Building 251 workers. The Building 251 workers were routinely monitored by urinalysis for 

transuranic materials using a gross alpha method. In addition, gross beta urinalysis appears to have 

been added for at least some of these individuals as of 1984.

Evaluation of urinalysis data for internal dose contributors other than U-233 during the period 1974–

1989, and for all internal dose contributors during 1990–1995, will be performed by NIOSH 

subsequent to this initial evaluation for U-233.

7.2.1.2 In Vivo Counting Information and Available Data

No database or similar compendium of in vivo monitoring data for LLNL workers currently exists. 

Review of LLNL in vivo monitoring data included in claim files showed LLNL workers were 

monitored using chest/lung counting, whole-body scans, or both. Workers in Building 251 were 

included in the routine in vivo monitoring program. 

7.2.1.3 Airborne Levels

The 1990 Tiger Team assessment of LLNL (DOE, 1990) documented that air monitoring was the key 

element of the LLNL internal dose control program, and that air monitoring results were used to 

trigger more frequent bioassay measurements.

A review of Building 251 operations performed by the DOE San Francisco Operations Office during 

the period August 21–October 22, 1980 (Keheley, 1980) noted an “excessive” failure rate for the 

continuous air monitors used in the various laboratories in Building 251 and recommended that LLNL 

“vigorously pursue” improving the air monitoring in the building. The 1990 Tiger Team assessment 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

33 of 69

of LLNL noted that air monitors and air samplers did not appear to be strategically placed with respect 

to capturing representative samples of potential airborne releases. It further noted that breathing zone 

monitors were not used at LLNL, and placement of CAMs appeared to emphasize room air 

monitoring rather than representative workplace monitoring (DOE, 1990). Later documents (Howe, 

1991) also identified issues with the air monitoring program in Building 251. Air monitoring data 

from Building 251, therefore, are not considered sufficient for dose reconstruction during the period 

1974–1989.

Further evaluation of LLNL’s air monitoring program for the remainder of the site during 1974–1989 

and for the entire site for the period 1990–1995 will be performed by NIOSH subsequent to this initial 

evaluation of U-233 usage in Building 251.

7.2.1.4 Alternative Data Sources for Bounding Internal Dose

The coworker methodology presented in Attachment B of ORAUT-TKBS-0035-5 includes

information for assigning intakes of uranium. However, the underlying data are from LLNL’s massbased uranium urinalysis methods, requiring that an assumed specific activity be used to convert the 

results to activity units. The specific activity for different enrichments or isotopic mixtures of 

uranium can vary widely. The specific activity of U-233 exceeds that for natural uranium by more 

than four orders of magnitude. U-232, present as an impurity in U-233, further increases the specific 

activity of the mixture.

Given what appears to be a lack of routine in vitro monitoring for uranium for workers in Building 

251, an evaluation of whether the uranium coworker model sufficiently represents potential intakes of 

U-233 by those individuals cannot be made.

Evaluation of alternative data sources for internal dose contributors other than U-233 in the period 

1974–1989, and for all internal dose contributors during 1990–1995, will be performed by NIOSH 

subsequent to this initial evaluation of U-233.

7.2.2 Evaluation of Bounding Ambient Environmental Internal Doses

Building 251 discharged its process area exhausts through a local stack. Evaluation of ambient 

environmental internal doses at LLNL from all sources in the period 1974–1995 will be performed by 

NIOSH subsequent to this initial evaluation of U-233 usage in Building 251.

7.2.3 Methods for Bounding Internal Dose at LLNL

The following subsections summarize the methods for bounding internal dose at LLNL.

7.2.3.1 Methods for Bounding Operational Period Internal Dose

Review of the MAPPER database indicated that routine in vitro monitoring for workers in Building 

251 during 1974–1989 focused on transuranic materials via gross alpha and plutonium urinalyses. 

Additional routine monitoring for mixed fission products appears to have been specified for those 

individuals around 1984.

With respect to sensitivity for U-233, the chemistry used for the LLNL gross alpha procedure (see 

Miller, 1979) appears to have excluded uranium. The LLNL gross alpha procedure was essentially 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

34 of 69 

identical to the americium urinalysis procedure used at Los Alamos as of the late 1950s. In addition 

to americium and plutonium, the procedure states it also carried actinium, curium, neptunium, and 

thorium. There is no mention of uranium. It would have been desirable to exclude uranium from the 

analysis since any uranium present would have interfered with the assay for the transuranic analytes of 

interest, notably americium. The LLNL gross alpha procedure employed a bismuth phosphate 

extraction to pull the actinides of interest from the sample solution. This was the same chemical 

process employed initially at the Hanford site for large-scale extraction of plutonium from irradiated 

nuclear fuel. A key step in the bismuth phosphate process at Hanford was the addition of sulfate to 

the solution prior to the bismuth phosphate extraction. The presence of the sulfate kept the uranium in 

solution while allowing the plutonium to form an insoluble precipitate. Sulfate was also added to the 

sample solution just prior to the bismuth phosphate extraction step in the LLNL gross alpha urinalysis 

procedure. It seems reasonable that this was done for the same purpose (i.e., to keep the uranium in 

the solution so it did not interfere with the analysis). 

NIOSH determined that it cannot assume thorium decay products from U-233 (or the U-232 impurity) 

would have been sufficiently present in the gross alpha analysis given the fact it could have been 

removed during production, either directly or indirectly (Moment, 1999; Karlsson, 1977). Gross beta 

analysis, if performed, was deemed insufficient for U-233 given the lack of countable electron 

emission from U-233 + U-232 and the fact the beta-emitting decay products cannot be assumed to 

have been present. The plutonium procedure was specific for plutonium. 

In vivo monitoring at LLNL was accomplished via whole-body scanning and/or chest/lung counting. 

It is unknown what in vivo methods were used for Building 251 workers, though chest/lung counting 

would seem likely given the wide variety of transuranic materials handled there. Regardless, using 

LLNL’s in vivo data to assign potential doses from intakes of U-233 + U-232 would be highly 

uncertain given the gamma-emitting decay products cannot be assumed to have been present.

In summary, none of the in vitro or in vivo monitoring methods evaluated are determined by NIOSH 

to be sufficient for bounding potential internal doses from U-233 for workers in Building 251. 

Full evaluations of LLNL’s bioassay methods for other dose contributors during the period 1974–

1989, and for all dose contributors for 1990–1995, will be performed by NIOSH subsequent to this 

initial evaluation of U-233 use in Building 251 during 1974–1989. 

7.2.3.2 Methods for Bounding Ambient Environmental Internal Dose

Evaluation of ambient environmental internal doses at LLNL from all sources during 1974–1995 will 

be performed by NIOSH subsequent to this initial evaluation of U-233 use in Building 251 during 

1974–1989. 

7.2.4 Internal Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion

As presented in Section 5.2.1 above, NIOSH review of material inventory records indicates that U233 was refined into end products in Building 251 through at least 1988. In 1989, the frequency and 

nature of U-233 transfers changed indicating a possible change in U-233 production or usage. 

Pending further NIOSH evaluation of post-1989 U-233 operations, this report focuses on U-233 

operations in Building 251 during the period January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

35 of 69 

As presented in Section 7.2.3.1 above, NIOSH has determined that it has insufficient information to 

verify that the routine in vitro bioassay program for Building 251 workers (combinations of analyses 

for gross alpha in urine, gross beta in urine, and plutonium in urine) was adequately sensitive for 

detection of U-233 intakes during the period under evaluation. Similarly, NIOSH has determined that 

photon-emitting decay products and contaminants cannot be assumed to have been sufficiently present

in the U-233 source term to verify that the routine in vivo bioassay program for Building 251 workers 

was adequately sensitive for detection of U-233 intakes. 

As presented in Section 7.2.1.3 above, information available to NIOSH from multiple site inspections 

from 1980 to 1991 indicate deficiencies in LLNL’s implementation of the air monitoring program in 

Building 251. NIOSH has determined the air monitoring data from Building 251 may not be 

adequately representative of the worker breathing zones, and are consequently not considered 

sufficient for Building 251 dose reconstruction during the period under evaluation in this report. 

NIOSH has therefore concluded it is not feasible to reconstruct internal dose with sufficient accuracy 

from potential intakes of U-233 by workers in Building 251 during the period January 1, 1974 through 

December 31, 1989. Additionally, as presented in Section 5.1.2 above, NIOSH has determined that 

information currently available contains insufficient access control information or records for 

Building 251, and insufficient general site worker movement data, to allow NIOSH to accurately 

assess whether an energy employee, or class of employees, did or did not potentially enter Building 

251 during the period under evaluation in this report. Consequently, NIOSH is unable to define a 

class of LLNL workers for whom potential exposures in Building 251 are not possible, and therefore 

recommends the extension of the recommended class to include all workers during the period from 

January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 

NIOSH does not have access to sufficient personnel monitoring, workplace monitoring, or source 

term data to estimate potential internal exposures to uranium-233 associated with operations in 

Building 251. NIOSH is unable to identify workers that did not potentially enter Building 251 during 

the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. Consequently, NIOSH finds that it is 

not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy the internal doses for LLNL workers during the 

period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. For the purposes of timeliness, NIOSH is 

issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date, but will 

continue to review and evaluate internal and external exposures other than U-233 from 1974–1989, 

and all internal and external exposures from 1990–1995. 

Although NIOSH found that it is not possible to completely reconstruct internal radiation doses for the 

period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989, NIOSH intends to use any internal 

monitoring data that may become available for an individual claim (and that can be interpreted using 

existing NIOSH dose reconstruction processes or procedures). Dose reconstructions for individuals 

employed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory during the period from January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1989, but who do not qualify for inclusion in the SEC, may be performed using 

these data as appropriate.

7.3 Evaluation of Bounding External Radiation Doses at LLNL 

The principal source of external radiation doses for members of the evaluated class included a wide 

variety of radioactive materials and radiation-producing machines such as electron accelerators, X-ray 

machines, cyclotrons, neutron generators, and a research nuclear reactor. Table 2-2 in ORAUTTKBS-0035-2 summarizes building activities and radionuclides that workers could have encountered.
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

36 of 69

The following subsections address the ability to bound external doses, methods for bounding doses, 

and the feasibility of external dose reconstruction.

7.3.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process-Related External Doses

The following subsections summarize the extent and limitations of information available for 

reconstructing the process-related external doses of members of the class under evaluation. For the 

purpose of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility 

conclusions to date for internal exposures in Building 251, but will continue to review and evaluate all 

process-related external exposures for the period 1974–1995.

7.3.1.1 Personnel Monitoring

Photon and Beta

The LLNL site used TLDs for personal dosimetry during the period under evaluation. LLNL 

constructed the TLDs used from 1969–1984 using Harshaw TLD-100, TLD-200, TLD-600, and TLD700 elements. The use of Panasonic 802 and 810 dosimeters began in 1985 and has continued to the 

present. The dosimeter types, exchange frequencies, limits of detection, and estimates of missed 

doses are listed in Table 6-4 in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6.

NIOSH has found specific requirements for Building 251 that state that “[a]ll employees and visitors 

at LLNL are issued a thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD)” (LLNL, Nov1981 PDF p. 113). In 

addition, monthly, quarterly and annual summaries of worker exposure for Building 251 have been 

identified that list individual whole-body gamma and neutron totals by name. Many of these 

summaries included individual extremity exposures listed as “hand dose.”

As all LLNL employees and visitors to the LLNL site wore dosimetry in the form of personal TLD 

badges, and as DOE provides the monitoring data from these badges to NIOSH upon request, external 

photon and beta exposure may be reconstructed using the guidance in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. Data 

that have been made available to NIOSH have proven sufficient to estimate doses for the members of 

the class under evaluation for photon and beta exposures.

Neutron

Site procedures required neutron dosimetry for workers who may have been exposure to neutron 

radiation. As noted above, track etch neutron badges were assigned to workers at Building 251 who 

work with neutron-emitting radionuclides (LLNL, Apr1985 PDF p. 9). LLNL constructed the 

dosimeters used from 1969 through 1985, which contained Harshaw TLD-100, TLD-200, TLD-600, 

and TLD-700 elements (Hankins, 1982). The CR-39 track etch dosimeter was adopted in 1985 after 

several intercomparison studies (Hankins, 1987). Table 6-5 in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6 lists the time 

periods for the types of neutron dosimetry, the exchange frequencies, limits of detection, and 

estimated annual missed dose.

Neutron monitoring TLDs and CR-39 track etch dosimeters were used during the period being 

evaluated and provide adequate results to reconstruct neutron dose. DOE provides the dosimetry data 

upon request and ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6 may be used to reconstruct neutron dose from these data for 

workers with documented neutron exposure.
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

37 of 69

As the routine TLDs used for photon and beta dosimetry would detect neutron exposure, LLNL had a 

procedure to investigate any potential neutron exposures and quantify the spectrum using survey 

instruments (Hankins, 1982).

7.3.1.2 Area Monitoring

NIOSH has many examples of LLNL procedures that require routine and non-routine gamma, beta, 

and neutron surveys. For example, the Radiation Safety Program for Building 251, the Heavy 

Elements Facility, required that:

Any time that radioactive material is moved to a new location in the building (e.g., from one 

box to another, from floor storage to a box, etc.), beta, gamma and neutron surveys will be 

conducted when appropriate in that area to ensure that the workplace is providing proper 

shielding (LLNL, Jun1985 PDF p. 3).

Routine neutron monitoring was performed at accelerators (Powell, 1979), cyclotrons (Monitoring, 3rd

Quarter 1983), and at Building 332 (Ozaki, 1982). NIOSH has examples of documents describing the 

requirements for these measurements and documents containing survey results. Neutron surveys were 

performed using dosimeters placed in buildings (Ozaki, 1982) and using neutron instrumentation 

(LLNL, 1989 PDF p. 25).

NIOSH has examples of gamma and neutron survey results for some operations, in many cases 

collected together. Survey results for gamma are described in certain monthly reports from the Health 

Physics group (Powell, 1978; Campbell, 1981). Examples of gamma and neutron data are reported 

for the Metal Production Line in Building 332 (Wilson, Jun1987; Gordon, 1989; Wilson, 1986;

Wilson, Feb1987), for Building 231 (Wilson, 1983; Surveys, 1987), and for Building 212 (Willhoite, 

1979). An extensive neutron survey of many locations at LLNL, including Building 251, was 

performed in 1982 (Hankins, 1982 PDF pp. 18-19).

NIOSH has not located beta radiation area monitoring data in the over 5,000 documents acquired from 

LLNL. The general intent of the beta measurements required by site procedures was for confirmation 

of limits for materials release, working conditions, etc., and generally would not have been collected 

for reports or for dosimetric purposes. For the purpose of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report 

covering available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date for internal exposures in 

Building 251, but will continue to review and evaluate all ambient environmental external exposures 

for the period 1974–1995.

7.3.2 Evaluation of Bounding Ambient Environmental External Doses

As all LLNL employees wore TLD dosimeters and workers in areas with neutron radiation wore TLD 

or track etch neutron dosimeters, all photon, beta, and neutron exposure would have been tallied, 

regardless of the source. Any ambient exposure would have been included in the results and reported 

as part of the worker’s occupational exposure.

7.3.3 LLNL Occupational X-Ray Examinations

Baseline and periodic chest X-rays were performed for all employees at LLNL for the years between 

1952 and approximately 1993 (LLNL, 2002). Periodic X-rays were conducted “no more often than 

yearly and in many instances only every 2 years” (Schaer, 1964). ORAUT-TKBS-0035-3 describes 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

38 of 69 

the assumptions for estimating medical X-ray exposures at LLNL. Table 3-2 in ORAUT-TKBS0035-3 lists the dates and specific equipment used, along with their operating parameters. In addition, 

a radiation survey made by LLNL of the X-ray machine in use in 1975 provides specific parameters, 

including the “exposure at the skin from a typical radiograph” (Graham, 1975 PDF p. 2). Therefore, 

consistent with the findings of NIOSH’s 2010 evaluation of SEC-00163, NIOSH concludes that it is 

feasible to reconstruct occupational medical dose for LLNL workers with sufficient accuracy for the 

period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 

7.3.4 Methods for Bounding External Dose at LLNL

There is an established protocol for assessing external exposure when performing dose reconstructions 

(these protocol steps are discussed in the following subsections): 

• Photon Dose 

• Beta Dose

• Neutron Dose

• Medical X-ray Dose (as applicable per Section 7.3.3) 

7.3.4.1 Methods for Bounding Process-Related External Dose

Photon Dose 

The primary method is the use of individual records. All LLNL employees wore TLD dosimetry. 

The types of TLD used in the LLNL badges along with the applicable dates are known. Estimates of 

annual missed dose for these badges are listed Table 6-4 of ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. External photon 

dose can likely be reconstructed using the methods and assumptions listed in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. 

NIOSH will continue to review and evaluate all photon external exposures for the 1974–1995 period. 

Beta Dose

The primary method for bounding beta dose is the use of individual records. All LLNL employees 

wore TLD dosimetry. The types of TLD used in the LLNL badges along with the applicable dates are 

known. Missed dose may be calculated using the limits of detection for these badges along with the 

exchange frequencies as reported by DOE for individual workers. External beta dose can likely be 

reconstructed using the methods and assumptions listed in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. NIOSH will 

continue to review and evaluate all beta external exposures for the 1974–1995 period. 

Neutron Dose 

The primary method for bounding neutron dose is the use of individual records. Workers who were 

expected to incur exposure to neutron radiation wore TLD or track etch monitoring badges. Estimates 

of annual missed dose for these badges are listed Table 6-5 of ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. All workers 

wore TLD badges that would have detected neutron radiation. Those who may have been exposed to 

neutron radiation and without neutron dosimetry would have been assigned neutron exposure using 

site procedures. External neutron dose can likely be reconstructed using the methods and assumptions 

listed in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-6. NIOSH will continue to review and evaluate all neutron external 

exposures for the 1974–1995 period. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

39 of 69

Medical X-ray Dose

Site documents list frequencies for required X-rays and types of machines used along with applicable 

dates. As presented in Section 7.3.3 above, NIOSH concludes that it is feasible to reconstruct 

occupational medical dose for LLNL workers with sufficient accuracy for the period from January 1, 

1974 through December 31, 1989, using ORAUT-TKBS-0035-3.

7.3.4.2 Methods for Bounding Ambient Environmental External Doses

Any ambient exposure would have been included in the results and reported as part of the workers’ 

occupational exposures. Ambient external dose can likely be reconstructed using the methods and 

assumptions listed in ORAUT-TKBS-0035-4. NIOSH will continue to review and evaluate all 

ambient external exposures for the period 1974–1995.

7.3.5 External Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion

Consistent with the findings of NIOSH’s 2010 evaluation of SEC-00163 (NIOSH, 2010), external 

dose for photon, beta, and neutron exposures can likely be reconstructed for all members of the 

evaluated class for the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. A full evaluation of 

external dose feasibility will be performed by NIOSH, for the period from January 1, 1974 through 

December 31, 1995, subsequent to this initial evaluation of Building 251 exposures during 1974–

1989.

Also consistent with the findings of NIOSH’s 2010 evaluation of SEC-00163, NIOSH concludes that 

it is feasible to reconstruct occupational medical dose for LLNL workers with sufficient accuracy for 

the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989.

7.4 Evaluation of Petition Basis for SEC-00221

The following subsections evaluate the assertions made on behalf of petition SEC-00221 for LLNL.

7.4.1 Implementation of Workplace Radiological Controls

Issue: The petitioner submitted a report from the DOE Office of Environment, Safety, and Health 

Assessments, dated August 2014. The petitioner stated that the document “directly fits the 

requirements for an SEC Petition Section F-4 document.” The report includes one “Finding” and 10 

“Opportunities for Improvement.” The finding stated that LLNL line management had not ensured 

that sufficient contamination controls and radiological surveys were implemented during radiological 

work, as needed to prevent the potential for inadvertent spread of contamination to clean areas. The 

audit finding did not indicate that any actual contamination was found or if any internal exposure 

resulted. The “opportunities for improvement” included management, procedural, and training 

recommendations and specific recommendations for more frequent verification surveys for 

contamination control.

Response: A NIOSH review indicated that none of the deficiencies listed in the DOE oversight report 

identified dosimetry and related information that are unavailable (due to either a lack of monitoring or 

the destruction or loss of records) for estimating radiation doses. NIOSH did not find support for 

qualification under the F.4 basis. This current NIOSH evaluation addresses specific exposures in 

Building 251 during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. NIOSH is issuing 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

40 of 69

this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date (see Sections 7.2 and

7.3 of this report), but will continue to review and evaluate LLNL workplace radiological controls as 

they relate to internal and external exposures during the entire period qualified for evaluation, January 

1, 1974 through December 31, 1995.

7.4.2 Adequacy of the NIOSH LLNL Site Profile

Issue: The petitioner submitted a 2006 letter sent to NIOSH by a third party (Tri-Valley CAREs) 

which included criticism of NIOSH’s LLNL Site Profile, primarily about known incidents and a 1990 

Tiger Team Report that were not considered in the Site Profile. The letter states that “The Site Profile 

does not acknowledge that many records have been destroyed, misplaced or are inaccurate.”

Response: A NIOSH review indicated that, while it was asserted that records have been lost, the letter 

does not specifically indicate instances of monitoring records being lost, or when they may have been 

lost. The statement was not submitted as an affidavit and NIOSH did not find support for 

qualification from the submitted documents. However, NIOSH’s review of the Site Profile 

methodologies indicated that information presently available to NIOSH does not provide evidence 

that the gross alpha in vitro bioassay measurements, upon which some coworker analyses are based, 

include all potential exposure scenarios of concern. Consequently, NIOSH determined that an 

evaluation was warranted into the adequacy of the gross-alpha-based coworker dose methods of 

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-5. NIOSH deemed the need for further research of LLNL gross-alpha 

monitoring practices sufficient to qualify SEC-00221 for evaluation. This current NIOSH evaluation 

addresses specific exposures in Building 251 during the period from January 1, 1974 through 

December 31, 1989. NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility 

conclusions to date (see Sections 7.2 and 7.3 of this report), but will continue to review and evaluate 

internal and external exposures during the entire period qualified for evaluation, January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1995.

7.4.3 Adequacy of the LLNL Radiological Protection Program

Issue: The petitioner directed NIOSH to a June 1990 assessment titled “Tiger Team Assessment of the 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, DOE/EH-0142,” and to the site response action plan for 

the assessment. As supporting evidence, the petitioner also provided internet links to excerpts from 

the LLNL Environmental Impact Statements (EIS). The Tiger Team assessment’s key findings were 

organized into the headings: Environmental, Occupational Safety and Health Act Compliance; 

Environmental Assessment; Safety and Health Assessment; and Occupational Safety and Health Act 

Compliance Assessment. Under Safety and Health Assessment was a category named Radiological 

Protection. The petitioner did not direct NIOSH to any specific report sections as support of any 

petition basis.

Response: As noted above, this current NIOSH evaluation addresses specific exposures in Building 

251 during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. Some issues relating to 

NIOSH’s infeasibility determination for the period 1974 through 1989 are supported by the Tiger 

Team observations in the 1990 assessment. NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data 

sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date (see Sections 7.2 and 7.3 of this report), but will 

continue to review and evaluate the Tiger Team and EIS reports as they relate to internal and external 

exposures during the entire period qualified for evaluation, January 1, 1974 through December 31, 

1995.
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

41 of 69 

7.5 Other Potential SEC Issues Relevant to the Petition Identified During the 

Evaluation

During the feasibility evaluation for SEC-00221, a number of issues were identified that needed 

further analysis and resolution. The issues and their current status are identified in the subsections 

below. 

7.5.1 Adequacy of Gross Alpha In Vitro Monitoring Program

Issue: As presented in Section 3.0, information available to NIOSH did not provide evidence that the 

gross alpha bioassay measurements, upon which some coworker analyses are based, include all 

potential exposure scenarios of concern. NIOSH noted that gross alpha urine monitoring of 

transuranic exposures in Building 251 warranted evaluation, including neptunium exposures through 

1995. NIOSH qualified petition SEC-00221 for evaluation based on observed transuranic operations 

through 1995 that were potentially inadequately monitored using gross-alpha in vitro bioassay 

methods.

Response: During its evaluation of the qualified period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 

1995, NIOSH determined that U-233 exposures in Building 251 were inadequately monitored by the 

site’s gross alpha in vitro sampling program through December 31, 1989 (see Sections 7.2 and 7.3 of 

this report). For the purposes of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data 

sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date for U-233 exposures in Building 251, but will continue 

to review and evaluate the site in vitro and in vivo bioassay monitoring programs as they relate to 

internal and external exposures other than U-233 from 1974–1989, and all internal and external 

exposures from 1990–1995. 

7.5.2 Adequacy of Internal Dose Coworker Distributions

Issue: From reviews of the LLNL site profile and available documents, NIOSH determined there is 

potential for neptunium and/or thorium exposures at both the main campus site and Site 300 that may 

not be reflected in the current coworker models.

Response: NIOSH has determined in this report that U-233 exposures in Building 251 were 

inadequately monitored by the site’s gross alpha in vitro sampling program through December 31, 

1989 (see Sections 7.2 and 7.3). NIOSH will continue full feasibility evaluation for other dose 

contributors during the 1974–1989 period (including HEU, thorium, neptunium, metal tritides, and all 

external exposures), and for all dose contributors in the period 1990–1995. These evaluations will 

consider the applicability of the existing coworker methods for LLNL. 

7.5.3 Representativeness of Workplace Air Monitoring

Issue: A review of Building 251 operations performed by DOE during the period August 21–October 

22, 1980 noted an “excessive” failure rate for the continuous air monitors used in the various 

laboratories in Building 251 and recommended that LLNL “vigorously pursue” improving the air 

monitoring in the building. The report identified other concerns with radiological operations in 

Building 251, including the standard practice of removing materials from glove boxes via open-air 

transfer. The 1990 Tiger Team assessment of LLNL noted that air monitors and air samplers did not 

appear to be strategically placed with respect to capturing representative samples of potential airborne 

releases. It further noted that breathing zone monitors were not used at LLNL.
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

42 of 69 

Response: NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions 

to date (see Sections 7.2 and 7.3 of this report) for the period 1974 through 1989, but will continue to 

review and evaluate the LLNL air monitoring program adequacy, including its use as a trigger for 

follow-up bioassay, during the entire period qualified for evaluation, January 1, 1974 through 

December 31, 1995. 

7.6 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00221

This report evaluates the feasibility for completing dose reconstructions for employees at LLNL from 

January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. NIOSH found that the available monitoring records, 

process descriptions, and source term data are not sufficient to complete dose reconstructions for the 

class of employees evaluated in this report. NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data 

sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date, but will continue to review and evaluate the internal 

and external exposures during the entire period qualified for evaluation, January 1, 1974 through 

December 31, 1995. 

Table 7-1 summarizes the results of the feasibility findings at LLNL for each exposure source during 

the evaluated time period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. 

Table 7-1: Summary of Feasibility Findings for SEC-00221 (January 1, 1974–December 31, 1989)

Source of Exposure Reconstruction Feasible

Internal1 No

U-233 in Building 2512 No

All other radionuclides Reserved for further evaluation3

External Reserved for further evaluation3

Gamma Reserved for further evaluation3

Beta Reserved for further evaluation3

Neutron Reserved for further evaluation3

Occupational Medical X-ray Yes

1 Internal includes an evaluation of urinalysis (in vitro), workplace/airborne contamination, and lung 

(in vivo) data. 

2 NIOSH is unable to identify workers that did not potentially enter Building 251 during the period from 

January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989. Therefore, the recommended SEC class includes all 

workers during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989.

3 For the purpose of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and 

feasibility conclusions to date, but will continue to review and evaluate internal and external exposures 

other than U-233 from 1974–1989, and all internal and external exposures from 1990–1995.

As of February 3, 2016, a total of 830 claims have been submitted to NIOSH for individuals who 

worked at LLNL during the period under evaluation in this report. Dose reconstructions have been

completed for 628 individuals (~76%). 

Although NIOSH found that it is not possible to completely reconstruct radiation doses for the 

proposed class, NIOSH intends to use any internal and external monitoring data that may become 

available for an individual claim (and that can be interpreted using existing NIOSH dose 

reconstruction processes or procedures). Therefore, dose reconstructions for individuals employed at 

LLNL during the period from January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1989, but who do not qualify for 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

43 of 69

inclusion in the SEC, may be performed using these data as appropriate. For the purposes of 

timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions 

to date, but will continue to review and evaluate internal and external exposures other than U-233 

from 1974–1989, and all internal and external exposures from 1990–1995.

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00221

The health endangerment determination for the class of employees covered by this evaluation report is 

governed by both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3). Under these requirements, if it is not 

feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy radiation doses for members of the class, NIOSH must 

also determine that there is a reasonable likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered the 

health of members of the class. Section 83.13 requires NIOSH to assume that any duration of 

unprotected exposure may have endangered the health of members of a class when it has been 

established that the class may have been exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have 

involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring during nuclear criticality incidents. If 

the occurrence of such an exceptionally high-level exposure has not been established, then NIOSH is 

required to specify that health was endangered for those workers who were employed for a number of 

work days aggregating at least 250 work days within the parameters established for the class or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 

employees in the SEC.

NIOSH’s evaluation determined that it is not feasible to estimate radiation dose for members of the 

NIOSH-evaluated class with sufficient accuracy based on the sum of information available from 

available resources. Therefore, the resulting NIOSH-proposed SEC class must include a minimum 

required employment period as a basis for specifying that health was endangered. NIOSH has 

determined that members of the class were not exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to 

have involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring during nuclear criticality incidents. 

However, the evidence reviewed in this evaluation indicates that some workers in the class 

accumulated chronic radiation exposures through intakes of radionuclides and from direct exposure to 

radioactive materials. Consequently, NIOSH is specifying that health was endangered for those 

workers covered by this evaluation who were employed for a number of work days aggregating at 

least 250 work days within the parameters established for this class or in combination with work days 

within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the SEC.

9.0 Class Conclusion for Petition SEC-00221

Based on its research to date of the class under evaluation, NIOSH has defined a single class of 

employees for which NIOSH cannot estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy. The NIOSHproposed class to be added to the SEC includes all employees of the Department of Energy, its 

predecessor agencies, and its contractors and subcontractors who worked in any area at the Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California, during the period from January 1, 1974 

through December 31, 1989, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring 

either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters 

established for one or more other classes of employees in the SEC.

NIOSH has carefully reviewed all material sent in by the petitioner, including the specific assertions 

stated in the petition, and has responded herein (see Section 7.4). NIOSH has also reviewed available 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

44 of 69

technical resources and many other references, including the Site Research Database (SRDB), for 

information relevant to SEC-00221. In addition, NIOSH reviewed its NOCTS dose reconstruction 

database to identify EEOICPA-related dose reconstructions that might provide information relevant to 

the petition evaluation. For the purposes of timeliness, NIOSH is issuing this report covering 

available data sufficiency and feasibility conclusions to date, but will continue to review and evaluate 

internal and external exposures other than U-233 from 1974–1989, and all internal and external 

exposures from 1990–1995.

These actions are based on existing, approved NIOSH processes used in dose reconstruction for 

claims under EEOICPA. NIOSH’s guiding principle in conducting these dose reconstructions is to 

ensure that the assumptions used are fair, consistent, and well-grounded in the best available science. 

Simultaneously, uncertainties in the science and data must be handled to the advantage, rather than to 

the detriment, of the petitioners. When adequate personal dose monitoring information is not 

available, or is very limited, NIOSH may use the highest reasonably possible radiation dose, based on 

reliable science, documented experience, and relevant data to determine the feasibility of 

reconstructing the dose of an SEC petition class. NIOSH contends that it has complied with these 

standards of performance in determining the feasibility or infeasibility of reconstructing dose for the 

class under evaluation.
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

45 of 69

10.0 References

42 C.F.R. pt. 81, Guidelines for Determining the Probability of Causation Under the Energy 

Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule, Federal 

Register/Vol. 67, No. 85/Thursday, p. 22,296; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 19391

42 C.F.R. pt. 82, Methods for Radiation Dose Reconstruction Under the Energy Employees 

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 

19392

42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees as Members of the Special 

Exposure Cohort Under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 

2000; Final Rule; May 28, 2004; SRDB Ref ID: 22001

42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7385 [EEOICPA], Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

Program Act of 2000, as amended

Campbell, 1981, Health Physics Group Monthly Report-July 1981, correspondence to W. J. Silver; G. 

W. Campbell; August 11, 1981; SRDB Ref ID: 72850, PDF p. 6

DCAS-PR-004, Internal Procedures for the Evaluation of Special Exposure Cohort Petitions, Rev. 1;

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); Cincinnati, Ohio; April 15, 2011; 

SRDB Ref ID: 94768

DOE, 1987, DOE/EH Beryllium Operations Review for February 17-19, 1987; Department of Energy 

(DOE); draft March 6, 1987; SRDB Ref ID: 6173, PDF pp. 23-29

DOE, 1990, Tiger Team Assessment of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, DOE/EH-0142; 

Department of Energy (DOE); June 1990; SRDB Ref ID: 23024

DOE, 1992, Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report for Continued 

Operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, 

Livermore, Appendix A-Description of Major Programs and Facilities, DOE/EIS-0157; Department 

of Energy (DOE); August 1992; SRDB Ref ID: 140713

DOE, 2005, Final Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory and Supplemental Stockpile Stewardship and Management 

Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 1, Chapters 1 through 12, DOE/EIS-0348; 

Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA); March 2005; SRDB 

Ref ID: 23016

Gibson, 1983, Building 251 Personnel Dosimetry Results for December 1982 and January 1983, 

correspondence to W. Hutchin; T. A. Gibson; March 28, 1983; SRDB Ref ID: 148713, PDF p. 3

Gordon, 1989, Weekly MPL Line Surveys, correspondence with attachments to Health and Safety 

Technicians; Lisa E. Gordon; April 28, 1989; SRDB Ref ID: 72995

Graham, 1975, Radiation Survey of the X-Ray Unit at Building 310, correspondence to J. O. Beatty; 

C. L. Graham and G. E. Williams; April 1, 1975; SRDB Ref ID: 13877, PDF pp. 2-5
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

46 of 69 

Gray, 2006, LLNL Heavy Element Facility, Building 251: A Short History of the Risk Reduction 

Program, UCRL-AR-226595, Leonard W. Gray, Brian Anderson, Corey Cate, Reggie Gaylord, 

Jennifer Larson, Mark Mitchell, Rob Vellinger, and Mike West; May 2006; SRDB Ref ID: 74853 

Hankins, 1980, Personnel Neutron Dosimetry at LLNL, correspondence to Lyle Cox; Dale Hankins; 

October 22, 1980; SRDB Ref ID: 72949 

Hankins, 1982, Evaluation of the Neutron Dose Received by Personnel at the LLNL, UCID-19385; 

Dale E. Hankins; May 1, 1982; SRDB Ref ID: 72180 

Hankins, 1987, The LLNL CR-39 Personnel Neutron Dosimeter, UCRL-96447; Dale E. Hankins, 

Steven Homann, and Joane Westermark; September 29, 1987; SRDB Ref ID: 80274 

Howe, 1991, Air Monitoring/Building 251, correspondence to Jerry Landrum; Harry Howe; May 28, 

1991; SRDB Ref ID: 15146 

Inventory, 2004-2005, Heavy Element Inventory in Building 251 Mosler Safes; inventory includes 

dates ranging from December 9, 2004 through February 2, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 74851 

Karlsson, 1977, Research and Development Semiannual Progress Report for January through June 

1976; Robert H. Karlsson; February 14, 1977; SRDB Ref ID: 122538

Keheley, 1980, SAN Review of Building 251 Operations at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; 

review by Ed Keheley; conducted during various visits from August 21, 1980 through October 22, 

1980; SRDB Ref ID: 36369, PDF pp. 2-14 

LLL, 1980, Facility Safety Procedures-Building 251 Nuclear Chemistry Division Facility Operations, 

Procedure 251; Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL); Revised June 1, 1980; SRDB Ref ID: 36368 

LLNL, 1977, Health and Safety Manual, Change 10 (Complete Manual Revision Includes Changes 

9&10); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); November 1, 1977; SRDB Ref ID: 15756 

LLNL, 1980-1981, Building 151/251 Nuclear Chemistry 1980 Health Physics Notes; no author listed; 

notebook is for 1980-1981; SRDB Ref ID: 148591 

LLNL, Apr1981, Organizations and Activities at Site 300; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 

(LLNL); select pages dated April 1, 1981; SRDB Ref ID: 15947 

LLNL, Nov1981, Facility Management Plan: Building 251—Heavy Element Facility Nuclear 

Chemistry Division; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); November 1981; SRDB Ref 

ID: 148290 

LLNL, Jan1985, Health and Safety Discipline Program Action Plan-Site 300; Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory (LLNL), Team 5; published ~January 1985; SRDB Ref ID: 16007 

LLNL, Apr1985, Radiation Safety Program Building 151, RSP-B151/8-1-85; Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory (LLNL); April 1985; SRDB Ref ID: 15030 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

47 of 69 

LLNL, Jun1985, Radiation Safety Program-Building 251, Heavy Elements Facility; signed by a health 

physicist and Safety Team Leader (cannot read signatures); report dated June 1985; signed August 21, 

1985; SRDB Ref ID: 15034 

LLNL, 1989, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Operational Safety Procedure, No. 381 

Supplement 50; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); revised May 15, 1989; SRDB 

REF ID: 147538, PDF pp. 24-33 

LLNL, 1991, Radiography Program; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Health 

Services Department; March 1991; SRDB Ref ID: 23011 

LLNL, 2002, NIOSH Request for Description of X-ray Protocols, correspondence; Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Health Services Department; May 17, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 

23021 

LLNL, 2005, About LLNL, website printout; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); 

retrieved and printed June 7, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 23008 

Mansfield, 1989, Health and Safety Manual Supplement 33.10, LLNL Internal Dosimetry Program 

Manual; G. Mansfield; October 1989; SRDB Ref ID: 14031 

Miller, 1979, M-104 Radiochemical Procedures for Bioassay; compiled by Holly H. Miller, edited by 

Isabelle A. Dupzyk; May 1, 1979; SRDB Ref ID: 13880 

Moment, 1999, History of Uranium-233 Processing at the Rocky Flats Plant, In Support of the 

REETS Acceptable Knowledge Program, RS-090-056; R. L. Moment, F. E. Gibbs, and C. J. Freiboth; 

April 1, 1999; SRDB Ref ID: 22101 

Monitoring, Jul 1982, Building 251 Personnel Dosimetry Results for July 1982, correspondence to W. 

Hutchin; T. Straume; September 29, 1982; SRDB Ref ID: 72941 

Monitoring, 3rd Quarter 1983, Quarterly Report: July through September 1983, correspondence to Joe 

McCaslin; Tony Greenhouse; October 20, 1983; SRDB Ref ID: 117882, PDF p. 5 

Monitoring, 3rd Quarter 1986, Facility Quarterly Report for Individuals Working in Building 251 with 

Summary of Doses Printout, correspondence to J. Landrum; Michael G. Trent; November 7, 1986; 

SRDB Ref ID: 15133 

Monitoring, 1986, Nuclear Chemistry Radiation Safety Program 1986 Annual Report; attachment to 

correspondence dated April 1, 1987; no date provided on report; SRDB Ref ID: 15121 

Monitoring, 2nd Quarter 1987, Second Quarter 1987 Radiation Safety Report with Summary of Doses 

Printout, correspondence to J. Landrum; Mike Trent; August 7, 1987; SRDB Ref ID: 15132 

Monitoring, 3rd Quarter 1987, Third Quarter 1987 Radiation Safety Report with Summary of Doses 

Printout, correspondence to J. Landrum; M. Trent; November 9, 1987; SRDB Ref ID: 15131 

Monitoring, 1st Quarter 1988, First Quarter 1988 Radiation Safety Report with Summary of Doses 

Printout, correspondence to Dave Sisson; Mike Trent; May 18, 1988; SRDB Ref ID: 15130 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

48 of 69

Monitoring, 2nd Quarter 1988, Second Quarter 1988 Radiation Safety Report with Summary of Doses 

Printout, correspondence to David Sisson; Mike Trent; September 12, 1988; SRDB Ref ID: 15129

Monitoring, 3rd Quarter 1988, Third Quarter 1988 Radiation Safety Report with Summary of Doses, 

correspondence to Dave Sisson; Mike Trent; December 8, 1988; SRDB Ref ID: 72557

Monitoring, 2nd Quarter 1990, Second Quarter Dosimetry Records for Nuclear Chemistry Personnel, 

correspondence to J. Landrum; K. L. Shingleton; August 20, 1990; SRDB Ref ID: 15148

Myers, 1979, Review of Medical X-ray Unit in Building 310, correspondence to George Liu; D. Myers 

and G. Williams; March 9, 1979; SRDB Ref ID: 13882

NIOSH, 2007, SEC Petition Evaluation Report for Petition SEC-00092, Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory; National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); December 3, 

2007; SRDB Ref ID: 147950

NIOSH, 2010, SEC Petition Evaluation Report for Petition SEC-00163, Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory; National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); January 21, 

2010; SRDB Ref ID: 147951

ORAUT-OTIB-0006, Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray 

Procedures, Rev. 04; ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; June 20, 2011; SRDB 

Ref ID: 98147

ORAUT-OTIB-0079, Guidance on Assigning Occupational X-Ray Dose Under EEOICPA for X-Rays 

Administered Off Site, Rev. 00; ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; January 3, 

2011; SRDB Ref ID: 89563

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-1, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Introduction, Rev. 00; ORAU 

Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; effective July 18, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 22272

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-2, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Site Description, Rev. 00; 

ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; effective July 29, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 19554

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-3, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational Medical Dose, 

Rev. 01; ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; effective August 27, 2010; SRDB 

Ref ID: 86394

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-4, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational Environmental 

Dose, Rev. 01; ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; effective March 16, 2010; 

SRDB Ref ID: 79861

ORAUT-TKBS-0035-5, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational Internal Dose,

Rev. 02; ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; effective December 13, 2010; SRDB 

Ref ID: 90961

ORAUT- TKBS-0035-6, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – Occupational External Dose, 

Rev. 02; ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; February 26, 2010; SRDB Ref ID: 

79425
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

49 of 69

Ozaki, 1982, Neutron Dose Levels in Room 1345 and Room 1353, correspondence to Files; Calvin 

Ozaki; February 22, 1982; SRDB Ref ID: 15524

Powell, 1978, Health Physics Group Monthly Report-January 1978, correspondence to D. S. Myers; 

T. J. Powell; February 14, 1978; SRDB Ref ID: 72721, PDF pp. 28-30

Powell, 1979, Neutron Measurements at Bldg. 851, correspondence to W. Halladay, T. Jordan Powell; 

May 15, 1979; SRDB Ref ID: 72768

Schaer, 1964, Medical Supervision Program, correspondence to Hanno Knorr; Leonard R. Schaer; 

August 13, 1964; SRDB Ref ID: 72126, PDF p. 2

Sullivan, 2002, Historic Building Assessment LLNL Building 251: Heavy Element Facility, UCRLAR-151435; M. A. Sullivan and R. A. Ullrich; September 13, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 74584

Surveys, 1987, Building 231 Monthly Neutron and Gamma Survey Results; dates range from April 30, 

1987 through August 26, 1987; SRDB Ref ID: 15114

Willhoite, 1979, Determination of Gamma and Neutron Yearly Doses at the Building 212 Bus Stop; 

Steven B. Willhoite; December 12, 1979; SRDB Ref ID: 15066

Wilson, 1983, Health Physics Program Review for the Building 231 Complex, correspondence to E. J. 

Leah and W. J. Silver with attached results; R. L. Wilson and R. Velen; correspondence dated August 

16, 1983, review results dated June 24, 1983; SRDB Ref ID: 147882

Wilson, 1986, Metal Production Line-Box 9 Furnace, correspondence to James B. Knighton; Ross L. 

Wilson; August 29, 1986; SRDB Ref ID: 148120

Wilson, Feb1987, Metal Production Line-Box 9 Lazy Susan, correspondence to James B. Knighton; 

Ross L. Wilson; February 20, 1987; SRDB Ref ID: 148711

Wilson, Jun1987, Summary of MPL Routine Radiation Survey Data, correspondence to James B. 

Knighton; Ross L. Wilson; June 16, 1987; SRDB Ref ID: 15551
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

50 of 69 

This page intentionally left blank
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

51 of 69 

Attachment One: Data Capture Synopsis

The primary source for data added to the SRDB for LLNL was the Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory.

Data Capture Information

Primary Site/Company Name: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory DOE 1950-Present

Physical Size of the Site:

1) Main site, which is 820 acres housing 497 facilities that cover 6.7 million sq. feet. 

2) Site 300, which is 7,000 acres housing 216 facilities that cover 0.4 million sq. feet. 

Site Population: Currently the site has 6,300 employees. The employee population in 1958 was 

3,000. 

Data Capture Description

10 CFR 835 assessments of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), annual report of 

environmental levels of radioactivity, beta and alpha counter efficiency data, computer printout 

listing employee numbers and film badge numbers, aerial survey results for SNL/CA and LLNL, 

bioassay turnaround time report, dose summary, radiation doses in various buildings, radiation safety 

annual facility report, effluent monitoring report, AVLIS radiological safety, quarterly report on 

external dosimetry, stack emissions reports, dosimetry records for plutonium building workers, 

ALARA goals, area air monitoring results, hazard analysis of uranium inhalation at the Lawrence 

Livermore Laboratory, tritium release from Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, neutrons inside the 

containment of a pressurized water reactor, accident investigation report puncture wound by glass 

contaminated with transuranic material, accidental radon overexposure, accuracy of bioassay analyses, 

activation experiments at Super-Kukla, air sampling locations - Site 300, air transfers of radioactive 

materials, area swipe data sheets, AVLIS decontamination and demolition plan, personnel bioassay 

sample results, NESHAPS report, accidental removal of Cf-252 source from safety shield, perchloric 

acid tube explosion in glove box, contamination surveys, vault layout with radiation survey readings, 

background and efficiency data record, bioassay laboratory procedure manual, bioassay results, 

building floor plans, LINAC Health Physics notes, dosimetry study, radioactive isotope inventory log, 

special saliva bioassay sample, personnel external dosimetry report, Albedo neutron dosimeter list, 

Dale Hankins' notebook, neutron yield measurements at Shiva, discipline action plan Health Physics, 

am fecal samples, fecal samples, Co-60 and P-32, dosimetry from Tango T-15, E Beam test 

equipment, environmental backgrounds, environmental monitoring at the Lawrence Livermore 

Laboratory annual report, estimate of employee whole-body radiation exposure with plutonium lab 

survey, external exposure records, facility safety plan waste storage facilities and building, film badge 

and pocket dosimeter information, radiation safety report, fluorometric uranium urinalysis, hazard 

classification, hazards control quarterly reports, Health Physics program review and responses, 

internal dose assessments, lapel samples, building deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, 

and demolition project execution plan, LLNL operational safety procedures, lung counter MDA data, 

maps of contaminated material burial pits, medical X-ray exposure evaluation, MTX ionizing 

radiation shielding requirements and facility layout, neutron exposures, neutron shielding, Nevada 

Test Site (NTS) personnel gamma radiation exposures summary, NTS exposure for Lawrence Rad 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

52 of 69 

Lab (LRL) personnel, off-site radiation dose from buildings, phantom details and checklist, phoswich 

source checks, PLUTO quarterly reports, plutonium bioassay sampling, curves for Pu and Am, post 

shot bioassays, project pluto staff meeting minutes, neutron source strength of Tory II, radiation safety 

inspections, radiological analysis of Special Isotope Separation (SIS) decon facility, radiological 

hazards survey Astron operations, radiological safety analysis for conducting D-T shots in the nova 

target vessel, Ramjet Reactor tests begin in Nevada, results of building 321 fire, retention tank log 

April 1972 and U, Th, Am and Pu extraction calculations, dose from remelting heterogeneous 

plutonium metal, RML data GAB air spreadsheet, rotating target neutron source radiation safety 

program, safety analysis for neutron radiography, shielding measurements, Shiva Nova interim report 

laser fusion program, Site 300/400 air monitoring, skyshine, status of operational safety procedure, 

facility safety procedures and accident reports, storage of fuel grade plutonium in MBA-100, technical 

safety appraisal of building, history of radiobioassay analysis at LLNL, Livermore Pool Type Reactor 

(LPTR) design data, LLNL CR-39 personnel neutron dosimeter, National Ignition Facility Laser and 

Target Area Building conventional facilities environmental, safety, and health report, thyroid 

radioiodine intercomparison program, Tiger Team assessment of Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory, TLD calibration curves, Tory II-A report, Tory IIC reflector thickness total power study, 

tritium bioassay results, tritium releases from buildings, uranium in urine bioassay results, and wholebody count logs. 

Date Completed

12/21/2015 

Number Uploaded into SRDB 

3,069

Additional SRDB holdings for LLNL 

Table A1-1 contains additional data capture information reviewed for the development of the LLNL 

SEC Petition Evaluation Report. 
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

53 of 69

Table A1-1: Summary of Holdings in the SRDB for LLNL

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

State Contacted: NA Contacting the state was not considered necessary since Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory is an active DOE site and cooperates with relevant data collection. 

12/29/2015 0

Albany Research Center (ARC) Production and chemical isolation of Cm-242, Health Physics operating instructions, 

measurement of high-intensity gamma radiation, underground nuclear detonation of 

September 19, 1957 Operation Plumbbob, disposition of metal inventory, shipment of 

depleted uranium and tantalum, and operating procedures for Project Owl vacuum 

melting laboratory.

03/21/2013 8

Argonne National Laboratory East (ANLE)Monthly operation clean sweep status reports 1983. 03/24/2008 1

Battelle Memorial Institute - King Avenue Low-level solid radioactive waste burial, radiological waste calculations and shipment 

material, and radioactive waste management.

07/30/2013 2

Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) Brookhaven National Laboratory annual report 1957, compilation of ambient air 

monitoring parameters at DOE facilities, Cu-64 production with BNL's High Flux 

Beam Reactor, radiological control evaluation, and accelerator radiation exposures.

05/21/2009 5

Cincinnati Public Library History of the United States Atomic Energy Commission Volume III and an 

environmental regulatory guide for radiological effluent monitoring and environmental 

surveillance – 1991.

02/18/2009 2

Claimant Provided Explanatory notes from summary of bioassay results from individual dosimetry 

records, links between exposure to occupational hazards and illnesses in the DOE 

contractor workforce, re-suspension and ingestion of radioactive particles in the air, 

heavy ion fusion program 1999-2002, Spheromak magnets 1999-2001, and the

Toshiba Project 1996-1998.

07/13/2009 9

Colorado Mesa University - Tomlinson 

Library

Techniques in tritium monitoring by proportional counters. 10/16/2012 1

Colorado State University Hazards Control Department annual report, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 

fifty years of accomplishments, environmental assessment for the Explosive Waste 

Treatment Facility at Site 300, environmental monitoring annual report, workplace 

investigation of increased diagnosis of malignant melanoma, offsite hazardous waste 

shipment data validation report, national laboratory decontamination and waste 

treatment facility design waste characterization, X-ray imaging and X-ray source 

development, accelerator capability, design and operation of 140 ghz gyrotron 

oscillators, and an aerial radiological survey.

04/10/2006 16

Dade Moeller In-vivo thyroid monitoring for iodine-131 in the environment. 03/19/2007 1

DOE Albuquerque Final environmental impact statement for the continued operation of the Pantex Plant 

and hazard level classification of nonreactor nuclear facilities.

04/15/2010 2
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

54 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

DOE Carlsbad Waste acceptance criteria certification committee audit report, transuranic waste 

inventory stored at the Nevada Test Site, and assessment of radium septic waste 

recommendation for disposal, packaging and transport.

08/10/2010 7

DOE Environmental Management 

Consolidated Business Center (EMCBC), 

Denver

Investigation of the tritium release occurrence at the Rocky Flats Plant, investigation 

of neptunium crossover 1967, and production-scale plutonium-neptunium separation 

and residue recovery at Rocky Flats Plant.

12/12/2013 4

DOE Germantown Toxic hazards of beryllium, Nuclear Metals Inc. site description, certification docket 

of Gilman Hall, potential production of U-233 at Hanford, and handwritten notes taken 

during trip to DOE Germantown to review classified documents.

03/18/2014 14

DOE Legacy Management - Grand 

Junction Office

Request for equipment from CANEL Plant, survey work conducted at Albany 

Metallurgical Research Center, radioactive waste shipment, concentrations of 

plutonium in soil, containment practices in alpha and alpha-gamma facilities, 

radiological conditions of real property, evaluation of 1986 bioassay data, and a 

technical basis document for bioassay support services.

11/11/2010 12

DOE Legacy Management - Morgantown Hazardous Chemical Defense Waste Management Program, National Emission 

Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants proposed standards for radionuclides, 

department monthly progress report, Fernald shipments and receipts, bioassay analysis 

results, personnel dosimetry history, technical basis document for internal dosimetry, 

and a technical basis for bioassay sampling.

09/19/2011 54

DOE Legacy Management - MoundView 

(Fernald Holdings, includes Fernald Legal 

Database)

Annual review of Mound Laboratory, a history of the operation of the Feed Materials 

Production Center by NLO, incineration of radioactive solid wastes, DOE temporary 

stoppage of shipments to commercial burial grounds, effluent information system 

executive summary, annual radionuclide air emission report, progress reports of 

research departments efforts, incident investigations, plutonium shipments 1959-1964, 

reexamination of transuranic waste quantities planned for disposal, report for research 

on substitute materials, report on Mound Laboratory activities, polonium-208 research 

monthly progress, notes on Livermore project – 1955, Mound-Vue, major thorium 

campaigns at Fernald, neutron source progress report Monsanto Chemical Company –

1948, and In-vivo count data.

02/01/2012 62

DOE Legacy Management - Westminster Actions resulting from the tritium incident, annual report on mortality, body counter 

calibration procedure, body counter inter-calibration study, history of incineration and 

landfill operations Rocky Flats Plant, history of tritium detection at Rocky Flats, 

internal dosimetry quality assurance plan, lifetime dose calculations conversion of 

systemic burden and lung count data, outline an investigation of Building 123 H-3 

MDA, plutonium metal recovery, status of special tritium compounds.

10/22/2014 25

DOE National Nuclear Security 

Administration (NNSA)

NURE contracted activities. 01/17/2012 1
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

55 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

DOE Oak Ridge Operations Office Definitions of weapons-usable uranium-233, strategy for the future use and disposition 

of uranium-223, and an environmental, safety, and health self-assessment report for 

the Oak Ridge K-25 site.

07/25/2013 5

DOE Oak Ridge Operations Office -

Records Holding Task Group (RHTG)

ORNL neptunium requirements for the Ichiban Program, a monthly production report, 

uranium production statistics, thorium inventory, and U-233 deliveries.

04/08/2011 6

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical 

Information (OSTI)

Report on survey of irradiation facilities, human radiation experiments, annual reports 

of radioactive waste shipments, performance testing of personnel dosimetry services, 

nuclear science abstracts, electronuclear conversion of fertile to fissile material, stable 

isotope and heavy element inventories, isotope sales documents, thorium 

documentation involving thorium oxide, research and development semiannual 

progress report, uranium 233-235 crossover incident, neptunium processing at the 

Rocky Flats Plant, ORNL Health Physics appraisal, PLUTO Program quarterly 

progress report, and possible eye damage from ARGUS shot.

11/13/2014 37

DOE / SC&A Tritium contamination/weapons components. 02/22/2012 1

Department of Labor (DOL) Pinellas Plant hazard listing. 01/23/2012 1

DOL - Paragon Tritium activities in the United States, information related to low-level mixed waste 

inventory characteristics, safe operating procedures for assembly, handling, testing, 

and disassembly of the EPW RSP-101 rocket test vehicle, and an Industrial Hygiene 

inspection report.

02/25/2013 4

Eastern Kentucky University Library A newsletter from 1962. 05/07/2009 1

EML / HASL Thorium sampling and storage. 03/08/2005 1

Energy Technology Engineering Center 

(ETEC)

Summary of industrial accidents in USAEC facilities. 09/11/2002 1

Federal Records Center (FRC) - Denver Special radiation work permits, final radiological report for X-tunnel, photodosimetry 

evaluation book Volume IV, mixed waste streams, and options for recovery of Pu-244 

in the MARK 18a targets at the Savannah River Site.

01/31/2012 7

Federal Records Center (FRC) - Ft. Worth Visitor external dosimetry files. 06/26/2006 1

Federal Records Center (FRC) - Kansas 

City

Urine bioassay results. 10/09/2013 1
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

56 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Federal Records Center (FRC) - San Bruno Corrective action plan to the report of the task group on operation of Department of 

Energy tritium facilities, environmental sampling results 1966, procedure for 

preparation, issuance, and return of radioactive sources, quarterly environmental 

report, Health Physics aspects of whole-body radioisotope therapy, waste disposal 

procedure for drums containing greater than 10 mc, Health Physics department 

environmental radiation measurements, boundary exposure summary 1962, alpha 

activity in air samples taken in conjunction with the demolition of room 309, source 

control and evaluation, request for disposition instructions for plutonium-containing 

wastes, investigation of radioactivity on swipes from various shipping containers, 

UCRL-Berkeley air samplers, summary of whole-body radiation exposures to external 

penetrating radiation accumulated during the year 1958, the percentage breakdown of 

the dry active waste at LRL with respect to the radioactive content 1959, information 

on 184 inch cyclotron, decontamination group report, report on Conway - McLaughlin 

radiation exposure incident 1954, reactor operations procedure, Lydia Project 

ventilation, air and rain sample data summary, Radcon procedures, contamination 

monitoring 1955, Livermore and Site 300 area air sampling 1955, film badge 

accumulations maintained by Health Chemistry, Radiation Protection Program at 

UCRL, Radiation Laboratory Health Chemistry procedures for radioisotope safety, 

Lawrence Radiation Laboratory environmental radiation levels - Berkeley and 

Livermore, 1962, complete control of tritium water vapor by the use of silica gel, 

special equipment for the Carbon-14 Laboratory, fallout and natural background in the 

San Francisco Bay Area, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory ALARA, HILAC radiation 

surveys, summary of whole-body radiation exposures to external penetrating radiation 

accumulated during the year 1959-1971, annual radiation dose 1977-1986, Building 71 

floor plans, urinalysis record card, bioassay methods, Health Physics quarterly reports, 

bioassay logbooks, bioassay reports, procedure for nose swipes 1958, air sampling 

experience, and analysis of neutron shipping container.

04/16/2015 251

Federal Records Center (FRC) - San 

Bruno/SC&A

Absolute containment of a kilocurie 3H target at a low energy research accelerator, 

ventilation system for use in transcurium processing, disposal of radioactive waste 

materials, high-level spill at the HILAC 1959, and Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory use of dosimeters internal audit report.

01/17/2006 5

General Electric - Vallecitos Papers on dosimetry. 05/18/2007 1

Hagley Museum & Library Savannah River Site production reactor information, Hanford story, and exposures 

exceeding DOE standard.

09/30/2010 4
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

57 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Hanford Response concerning beta-emitting radionuclides counted in the LLNL gross beta 

radiochemistry procedure, American National Standard for dosimetry, history and 

stabilization of the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP), Hanford Laboratories operation 

monthly activities report, annual report Hanford atomic products operation, 

radionuclides background information, surplus neptunium-237, Health Division annual 

report, summary of information on neptunium oxide shipment from Hanford, 

highlights and significant changes of Internal Dosimetry Program monthly reports, and 

summary of appraisal of the Internal Dosimetry Project.

06/30/2015 42

Health Physics Journal Effect of air-scattered beta particles and beta and gamma dose measurements of 

Godiva IV.

12/03/2009 3

Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Personnel dosimetry and exposure control, lung and thyroid counter calibration 

information, Health Physics annual and upgrade status report, dosimetry branch 

activity monthly reports, CPP employee health case files, bioassay reports, radiation 

exposures, summary of all incidents 1959-1969, radioactive shipment records, Health 

Physics log sheets, progress reports, unreviewed safety question documentation, and 

standard operating procedures from 1982.

04/29/2015 35

Idaho National Laboratory - Idaho Nuclear 

Technology and Engineering Center 

(INTEC)

Documented communication. 09/10/2014 1

Interlibrary Loan Environmental levels of radioactivity at Atomic Energy Commission installations, 

tenth conference on hot laboratories and equipment alpha-gamma-neutron facilities, 

proceedings of the 1993 Incineration Conference, and proceedings of the Health 

Physics Society 1956.

08/22/2012 17

Internet - CDC Exposure assessment. 02/12/2007 1

Internet - Defense Technical Information 

Center (DTIC)

Occupational dose reduction at Department Of Energy contractor facilities, Sandia 

Corporation bibliography radiation effects, plutonium stabilization and disposition, 

establishment of a facility for intrusive characterization of transuranic waste at the 

Nevada Test Site, annual report to Congress, toxicological profile for ionizing 

radiation, and nuclear weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site.

07/30/2015 15

Internet - Defense Technical Information 

Center (DTIC) / SC&A

Idaho National Laboratory environmental annual report. 01/09/2012 1

Internet - DOE Guide of Good Practices for Occupational Radiological Protection in Plutonium 

facilities.

05/11/2007 1

Internet - DOE Environmental 

Management

Linking Legacies Chapter 3 - Wastes. 10/28/2007 1

Internet - DOE Legacy Management 

Considered Sites

Interim mixed waste inventory report. 04/24/2012 1
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

58 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Internet - DOE OpenNet Declassification of today's highly enriched uranium inventories, human radiation 

studies, the nuclear weapons program history summary, manufacturing statement for 

weapons production schedule of transfers, AEC financial report, Operation Teapot 

radioactivity concentrations in water, plutonium balance, Mound Pu-238 shipments, 

report on 8-inch isostatic press explosion at Site 300, protocol concerning the counting 

of subjects, and the impact of the revised 10 CFR 835 on the neutron dose rates.

09/17/2015 28

Internet - DOE OpenNet / NIOSH Annual report to Congress 1960. 01/11/2008 1

Internet - DOE OSTI Annual NESHAP report 1994 and a Pluto quarterly report. 07/14/2014 9

Internet - DOE OSTI Energy Citations Historical doses from tritiated water, environmental report, fast burst reactors in the 

U.S.A., resuspension of plutonium, annual report of waste generation, criticality safety 

at the department of energy Rocky Flats Plant, emergency response capability, 

radioactive waste disposal practices, Tiger Team assessment of the Lawrence Berkeley 

Laboratory, radioactive waste processing and disposal, characterization of particulate 

plutonium release in fuel cycle operations, removal of particulates from nuclear offgas, 

environmental survey preliminary report Nevada Test Site Mercury, DOE 2011 

occupational radiation exposure, research and ecology semiannual progress report, 

nuclear waste management quarterly progress report, seventeenth nuclear accident 

dosimetry intercomparison study, and a Pacific Northwest Laboratory annual report.

05/07/2013 44
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

59 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Internet - DOE OSTI Information Bridge Small-quantity-site transuranic waste disposition alternatives, actinide properties, 

introduction to Mound Facility, annual report of shipments to and from the Nevada 

Test Site (NTS), assessment of plutonium storage safety issues, characterization of 

transuranium-contaminated solid wastes residues, Chemical Processing Department 

monthly report, personnel dosimetry practices, Environmental Management progress

and plans, Hanford operation monthly activities report, hazardous waste certification 

plan, Heavy Ion Fusion Accelerator research (HIFAR) half-year report, historical 

doses from tritiated water and tritiated hydrogen gas released to the atmosphere, 

Imperial Valley environmental progress report, integrated data base report of spent 

nuclear fuel and radioactive waste inventories, inventory and sources of transuranic 

solid waste, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's book of minimum detectable 

activity for direct measurement of internally deposited radionuclides, list of DOE 

radioisotope customers, Mound Facility annual report, operational accidents and 

radiation exposure experience, plutonium-bearing materials feed report, preparation of 

plutonium waste forms with ICPP calcined high-level waste, Project Gasbuggy gas 

quality analysis, Pu-238 fuel-form processes quarterly report, radionuclide air emission 

report for 2009, Savannah River Laboratory monthly report, summary of radionuclide 

air emissions from Department Of Energy facilities, the application of neutron 

multiplicity counting to the assay of bulk plutonium bearing materials at Rocky Flats 

and LLNL, accreditation program for radiobioassay, user facilities at the Lawrence 

Berkeley Laboratory, worker radiation doses in the united states at the dawn of the 

atomic era 1940-1960.

12/02/2013 125

Internet - DOE OSTI Information Bridge / 

SC&A

Appraisal of reported dose at boundary of University of California Laboratory and 

environmental assessment for off-site transportation of low-level waste.

08/31/2009 2

Internet - DOE OSTI SciTech Connect Annual Health Physics 2009, analysis of the technical capabilities of DOE sites for 

disposal of residuals from the treatment of mixed low-level waste, characterization of 

the neutron fields in the LLNL Radiation Calibration Laboratory low scatter 

calibration facility, creating the Nuclear Weapons Laboratory, environmental 

monitoring plan, history and reflections of engineering at Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory, identification of buried structures, annual environmental report, 

NESHAPS annual report, Radiation Protection Program (RPP), low-level plutonium 

bioassay measurements, plutonium decontamination, qualifying radioactive waste 

forms for geologic disposal, review of mixed waste streams, semi-annual report on 

strategic special nuclear material inventory differences, and technical safety 

requirements for the waste storage facilities.

11/04/2015 61

Internet - DOE NNSA Nevada Site Office No relevant documents identified. 06/11/2015 0

Internet - Energy Employees Claimant 

Assistance Project (EECAP)

Nuclear criticality safety evaluation of Facility X-705 (Portsmouth), exposure rates 

from fallout at the Trinity Site, and Project Rio Blanco definition.

01/28/2014 3
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

60 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Internet - Google A 2013 site annual environmental report Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 

LLNL - facts and figures, ALARA analysis of radiological control criteria associated 

with alternatives for disposal of hazardous wastes, site 300 contour maps, annual 

transuranic waste inventory report, Building 331 tritium operations documented safety 

analysis, depleted uranium hexafluoride management program, occupational radiation 

exposure, report to Congress, laboratory accreditation program for personnel 

dosimetry systems, toxicological profile for uranium, environmental assessment 

conducted at the Kansas City Plant, environmental monitoring at the Lawrence 

Livermore Laboratory annual report, federal shipments of transuranic radioactive 

waste in California, final environmental impact statement and environmental impact 

report for continued operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia 

National Laboratories Livermore, site-wide environmental impact statement, finding 

aid for the K.Z. Morgan papers, groundwater contamination, in-situ 

chelation/reduction process, investigation of tritium in groundwater at Site 300, 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory experimental test Site 300 compliance 

monitoring program, environment, safety and health manual, NESHAPS annual report, 

prototype TLD badge, mixed analyze performance evaluation program, Paducah 

Gaseous Diffusion Plant site profile, plutonium storage, puncture wound causes 

internal plutonium contamination, radionuclide air emission report, RCRA facility 

investigation report, report on low-level nuclear waste shipments, review of 

environmental monitoring for radionuclides, Rocky Flats Plant Metal Research and 

Development Laboratory Building 865 photographs, record of decision Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory Site 300, annual site environmental report, 

determination of curium in fecal and chelated urine samples, portable tritium 

processing system, transuranic waste baseline inventory report, and a worker 

contaminated while working in a glovebox.

09/25/2015 383

Internet - Hanford DDRS Discussion of dose rate shot test samples, Hanford laboratories operation monthly 

activities report, 200 area monthly report, trip report meeting of industrial safety group 

Rocky Flats.

05/15/2015 17

Internet - Health Physics Journal Establishing bounding internal dose estimates for thorium activities at Rocky Flats, 

intercomparison study of Np-237 determination in artificial urine samples, 

characterization of the world's first nuclear explosion, dose to the public from tritium 

released to the atmosphere from LLNL 1953 – 2005, the Livermore phantom history 

and supplementation, Monte Carlo simulation of the in vivo measurement of lung 

activity, surveillance monitoring of soils for radioactivity: Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory.

06/11/2015 15

Internet - Journal of Occupational and 

Environmental Hygiene

No relevant documents identified. 06/11/2015 0
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

61 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Internet - Lawrence Berkeley National 

Laboratory (LBNL)

Site environmental report. 10/18/2006 4

Internet - Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory (LLNL)

Environmental monitoring plan. 02/07/2007 1

Internet - Los Alamos National Laboratory 

(LANL)

Radiochemistry of the elements. 07/10/2013 1

Internet - National Academies Press (NAP) Management for Health, Safety and Environmental within the Nuclear Weapons 

Complex, vitrification.

06/24/2015 2

Internet - National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

Beryllium contamination, evaluation report summary, Savannah River Site facts. 10/29/2015 6

Internet - NRC Agency wide Document 

Access and Management (ADAMS) 

Annual report to congress on federal government energy management and 

conservation programs, characterization project at Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory, audit report of the civilian radioactive waste management, quality 

assurance surveillance report, DOE office of civilian radioactive waste management 

office of quality assurance audit report, environmental restoration wastes, export 

license for transport logistics international to export natural uranium to Canada, 

Hanford site solid waste program environmental impact statement, high-level waste 

quality assurance task force summary of activities, Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage 

Investigations (NNWSI) project weekly highlights, NRC safety evaluation for quality 

assurance program plan, quality assurance audit plan, Savannah River Site long range 

comprehensive plan, surplus plutonium disposition final environmental impact 

statement summary, National Ignition Facility management, plutonium spill , Waste 

Isolation Pilot Plant annual report, USAEC byproduct material license 6-550-2, Yucca 

Mountain Project Argonne National Laboratory annual progress report, Yucca 

Mountain Project status report, Yucca Mountain quality assurance division quality 

assurance surveillance report of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

12/15/2014 195

Internet - Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

(ORNL) Library

"Chemical Technology Division annual progress report, disposal of radioactive wastes, 

Health Physics division annual progress report, measurements of fission and activation 

products for Oak Ridge National Laboratory transuranic waste characterization, 

operating experience summary, Operations Division monthly report, ORNL status and 

progress report, radioisotope distribution program progress report, status report on the 

disposal of radioactive wastes.”

05/29/2015 44

Internet - University of California Berkeley 

- Bancroft Library

Interview with Anne Low-Beer Dettner. 04/01/2008 1

Internet - US Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE)

No relevant documents identified. 11/07/2014 0

Internet - US Environmental Protection 

Agency NEPIS

Superfund record of decision. 11/10/2014 4
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

62 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Internet - US Transuranium and Uranium 

Registries

USTUR 0102: University of California wound, chronic inhalation 241AMO2. 08/23/2012 1

Kansas City Plant Statement of Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs, Department Of Energy, before 

the subcommittee on military procurement committee, annual environmental summary 

reports, source program and survey data 1989-1990, radioactive material inventory lots 

1958-1960, accidental x-ray exposure at the E-Beam Test Facility of Lawrence 

Livermore Laboratory , TMA Eberline radiation dosimetry services, daily operations 

reports.

10/20/2014 10

Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL) Radiological history report. 08/30/2007 1

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 

(LBNL)

Radiological status of Gilman Hall, Health Chemistry accident reports, floor surveys 

and log entries from the dismantling project of Gilman Hall, individual personnel 

exposure record, bioassay cards early years pre 1968, temporary badge exposures 

1951-1955, bioassay lab logbook, general description and operating characteristics of 

the Berkeley 88-inch cyclotron, proposed use of Np-237 at Site 300, LBNL site 

environmental reports, report on personnel radiation exposure incident 1954.

06/11/2009 141

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Radioactive waste disposal issues, accelerator health physics characterization report, 

request for Np-237.

08/15/2014 6

Los Alamos National Laboratory -

LAHDRA

History of critical experiments at Pajarito Site 1947-1983, Health Division annual 

report 1953, Pu incidents, environmental monitoring report 1987, interview with Mr. 

Harold l. Rarrick Albuquerque, New Mexico, quantities and characteristics of the 

contact-handled low-level mixed waste streams for the DOE Complex.

12/06/2007 7

Mel Chew & Associates Heavy Element Inventory in Building 251, authorization basis and readiness 

assessment lessons learned in the Building 251, safety considerations during the 

Building- 251 nuclear facility transition.

10/22/2009 3

Missouri Department of Natural Resources Environmental impact statement, plutonium working group report. 10/01/2008 2

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) - Atlanta

Powder from CANEL 1965, operational accidents and radiation exposure experience 

1943-1964, report concerning the explosion in laboratory E-21, building 4500 north -

ORNL/1965, accidents and related radiation exposures, Department of Energy indoor 

radon study volumes 1 and 2

05/20/2008 8

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) - College Park

Radiological condition surveys of real property, radiation contamination clearance 

report for parcel number 3, Site 300.

04/14/2010 5

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) - Kansas City

Survey and certification document of Gilman Hall. 01/12/2005 2

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) - San Bruno

Radiation exposure present in the public environment, air sampling sites and progress 

reports.

11/17/2008 2
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

63 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

National Institute for Occupational Safety 

and Health (NIOSH)

Semiannual report to the Congress by the United States Atomic Energy Commission, 

documented communication, Los Alamos National Laboratory tritium technology 

deployment, protocol for the epidemiological evaluation of cancer and occupational 

exposures at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, summary of Rocky Flats 

Plant waste buried, worker outreach meeting notes.

08/27/2014 43

National Institute for Occupational Safety 

and Health (NIOSH) / SC&A

Interview notes, highly enriched uranium working group report. 02/22/2012 6

Nevada Test Site (NTS) Closure report for corrective action at Nevada Test Site, double play Operation 

Flintlock on-site radiological safety report, final environmental impact statement for 

the Nevada Test Site and off- site locations, final environmental impact statement for 

the Nevada Test Site, LLNL NTS underground radionuclide source-term inventory, 

Plowshare Program Project Chariot an outline of phase iv activities, radionuclides in 

surface soil at the Nevada Test Site.

10/08/2014 15

New York State Archives Waste disposal at Lake Ontario Ordnance Works. 03/19/2012 1

NIOSH DCAS Claims Tracking System 

(NOCTS)

Tiger team action plan. 02/19/2015 1

Nuclear Metals and Equipment Corporation 

(NUMEC)

Essential reference material for BIDUG. 06/01/2005 1

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public 

Document Room

Analysis of the terminal waste form selection for the West Valley Demonstration 

Project, audit report of the civilian radioactive waste management system management 

and operating contractor at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, briefing on 

AVLIS uranium enrichment deployment plan, heap leach reclamation plan UMETCO 

Mineral Corporation, meeting summary - AVLIS meeting with U.S. Enrichment 

Corporation, Portsmouth GDP compliance plan for National Emission Standards For 

Hazardous Air Pollutants, quality assurance for gamma knives, safeguards research at 

Lawrence Livermore Laboratory.

12/19/2014 20

Oak Ridge Institute for Science and 

Education (ORISE)

Chelation DTPA data. 08/06/2009 4

Oak Ridge Library for Dose 

Reconstruction

Review of transfer factors for assessing the dose from radionuclides in agricultural 

products, evaluation of radiological exposure from Plowshare applications, Isotopes 

division annual report, Oak Ridge Y-12 plant historical uranium and radionuclide 

release report.

05/10/2011 6

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Electronuclear Research division annual progress report, Isotope Program progress 

report, Isotope Separations progress report, Isotopes Development center newsletter, 

ORNL status and progress report, request for special work forms plutonium returns 

and transfers, source and special nuclear material accountability report, transuranium 

processing plant semiannual report for production, status, and plans.

03/21/2014 39
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

64 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

ORAU Team Evaluation of NTA film in an accelerator environment and comparisons with cr-39, 

development of the 1996 proposed amendment to 10CFR835 occupational radiation 

protection, documented communication for SEC-00068, documented communication 

doe SEC-00192, documented communication for SEC-00195, DOE adoption of 1990 

ICRP recommendations on neutron weighting factors, annual report radiation 

exposures for DOE and DOE contractor employees, exotic radionuclides at the 

Savannah River Site, Hanford site - occupational external dose, implementation of the 

combination neutron dosimeter and the field neutron spectrometer, internal dosimetry 

coworker data for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, LLNL Heavy Element 

Facility, Building 251: a short history of the risk reduction program, standard 

methodology for overestimating external doses measured with thermoluminescent 

dosimeters, technical basis document for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 

- occupational external dose / occupational internal dose / occupational environmental 

dose.

02/24/2014 70

Pantex Plant Benefits study on special isotope separation, records transfer control documents, 

Tweezer Operations final report.

12/31/2008 3

Pantex Plant / SC&A Tritium contamination/weapons components. 06/23/2011 1

Rocky Flats Environmental Technology 

Site (RFETS)

Assessment of the flammability and explosion potential of defense transuranic waste. 05/17/2006 1

Science Applications International Corp 

(SAIC)

Radiation exposure summary. 09/02/2004 9

Savannah River Site (SRS) Dosimetry visitors cards, Health Protection monthly summary 1969, in vivo 

comparison report, Savannah River irradiated thorium, Savannah River laboratory 

monthly report, specifications for neptunium slugs interim irradiation program, trip 

report for neptunium information meeting.

01/12/2012 13

Sandia National Laboratory (SNL/CA) Proposed standardization of personnel film badges for Sandia Corporation, monthly 

and summary employee dosimetry data, environmental summary for SLL, film badge 

dosimetry results, internal/ external positive exposures and follow-up actions, LLNL 

radiation control areas, memorandum of agreement - Los Alamos/Sandia/Lawrence 

Livermore tritium processes lead laboratory assignment, review and evaluation of 

present film badge radiation monitoring program, Sandia Corporation, Livermore 

Laboratory, safe operating procedures, interview notes, Sandia - Livermore 

contaminated water waste disposal issue with tie in to GE Vallecitos.

04/29/2013 33
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

65 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Sandia National Laboratory (SNL/NM) "Description of the external QC program for in-vivo and in-vitro bioassay located at 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory 1991-1993, environmental analysis of metal particle 

dispersion from an explosive test at Tonopah test range, bioassay results, description 

of facility at Sandia Livermore and Tonopah, incident that includes plutonium and Oak 

Ridge National Laboratory 1957, radiation incident reports 1960 through 1978 with 

index, Ross aviation lab surveys, shipment surveys and shipping documents 1982,

environmental monitoring report for Sandia laboratories from 1964 through 1972, 

tritium bioassay records, webdose database external doses." 

02/17/2012 18

Sandia National Laboratory (SNL/NM) / 

SC&A

Health Physics aspects of operation Roller Coaster 1964. 03/28/2006 1

S. Cohen & Associates (SC&A) Neutron dose and energy spectra measurements at Savannah River Plant 1987, 

Operation Grommet, Operation Toggle - onsite radiological safety report, 

environmental sampling at Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, Berkeley, personnel 

dosimetry associated with the handling of large numbers of 3-kg Pu-239 billets,

proposal for expanded operations at Site 300, thorium hydrodynamic shots at Site 300, 

site environmental report, documented communication, annual radiation safety review 

- LRL Berkeley, Chemistry Division annual report, Medical And Health Physics 

quarterly report, operational safety procedures, neutron depth dose from alpha-neutron 

(a, n) and gamma-neutron (y, n) sources in a tissue-equivalent phantom, Am-241 hand 

incident and other incidents, radiation levels around UCRL accelerators, measurement 

of average neutron energies for (a, n) neutron sources, history of Donner laboratory, 

experimental shielding studies at high energy proton accelerators, LBL pursuit of 

DOELAP accreditation: a chronology, radiation studies at a medium energy 

accelerator, some energy spectra of stray neutrons from the Bevatron, survey of 

program Donner laboratory and Donner pavilion, environmental reports, Gilman hall 

decontamination project, stack releases, Nuclear Science division 1annual report, 

accuracy of very-high-energy radiation monitoring, accelerator neutron spectra and 

spectra to dose conversion, report of the bioassay program, SNM licensing, shipping 

reports, air sample data and urinalysis information 1956-1971, SLAC today newsletter.

08/05/2011 103

SC&A / INL Health physics tritium control, airborne radionuclide waste management, transuranic 

elements in the environment.

06/24/2010 3

SC&A / Internet - DOE OpenNet Plutonium - the first 50 years. 10/28/2014 1

SC&A / NIOSH Environment, safety and health progress assessment of the Pantex Plant. 06/01/2011 1

SC&A / Pinellas Plant Annual report on waste generation and minimization progress. 06/24/2010 1

SC&A / San Bruno FRC Adsorption of Xenon in an activated charcoal column. 07/31/2014 1

SC&A / SNL/CA Tritium release occurrence reports, Management Assurance department quarterly 

status report.

03/31/2009 9

SC&A / SSFL Tritium symposium trip report. 06/24/2010 1
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

66 of 69

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Stanford Linear Accelerator Center 

(SLAC)

Calibration of PuLi 238 source. 08/18/2006 1

Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, 

IL

AEC construction cost differentials. 10/15/2008 1

Tri Valley Cares Environmental impact statement, Type B Accident investigation report, Curium intake 

by shredder operator.

03/14/2005 3

University of Colorado - Norlin Library AEC workshop on neutron dosimetry, environmental impact statement, aerial 

radiological survey of LLNL 1975.

06/07/2007 5

University of Tennessee Library Report of Am-241 content in whole body, five compartment model for the kinetic 

distribution of americium in man, estimation of initial distribution of Am-241 in adult 

male human skeleton.

03/18/2010 4

Unknown Chemistry and Materials Science radiation safety report of the tritium facility, new 

model for evaluating internal dose from the intake of Polonium-210, albedo-neutron 

dosimetry studies at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, examination of the pathways 

from soil to man for plutonium, overview of the history of Y-12 (1942-1992), angular 

dependence of Eastman type a (NTA) personnel monitoring film, average annual air 

concentrations 1961-1969, Brookhaven National Laboratory site environmental report 

for calendar year 1997, californium-252, proceedings of a symposium, bioassay report, 

decommissioning information, investigations and summary reports of thorium, 

occupational radiation exposure report, Gasbuggy on-site radiological safety during 

production testing January 25, 1968 to December 31, 1969, Gasbuggy preliminary 

post-shot summary report, history of personnel external dosimetry program at the 

Dayton project and Mound laboratory 1946-1993, NYOO records 1948-1958, 

processes and characteristics of major isotopes handled at Mound, project Gasbuggy 

radiation contamination clearance report, radiation doses - Building 331 - 1984-1985, 

results of calculations of external gamma radiation exposure rates from fallout and the 

related radionuclide compositions operation Plumbbob 1957, Rocky Flats site history, 

Sylvania Corning plant and FEMP (FMPC) recycled uranium receipts and shipments.

03/30/2007 59

Unknown / SC&A Pantex Plant personnel dosimetry records - Clarksville reports, operation Fusileer 

onsite radiological safety report, operation Charioteer onsite radiological safety report, 

technical plan for project GasBuggy, project GasBuggy on-site radiological safety 

report Plowshare program, operation Latchkey on-site radiological safety report, 

operation Phalanx onsite radiological safety report.

03/30/2007 8
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

67 of 69 

Data Capture Information Data Capture Description Date 

Completed 

No. Uploaded 

into SRDB

Washington University Library Film technique for dosimetry of Am-241, radiation and temperature distributions 

resulting from the Logan event, hazards summary report for the LRL critical facility, 

Health Chemistry and Health Physics sections from "Medical and Health Physics 

quarterly report" 1955, properties of the environment of underground nuclear 

detonations at the Nevada Test Site Rainier event, radiation and temperature 

measurements of the Neptune event, radioactivity associated with underground nuclear 

explosions, radiochemical procedures in use at the University of California Radiation 

Laboratory Livermore, the Neptune event a nuclear explosive cratering experiment, 

urinalysis for curium by electrodeposition.

04/27/2007 13

Weldon Spring Skin contamination during gage removal final report. 11/29/2004 1

West Valley Demonstration Project 

(WVDP)

Shipment information. 11/28/2006 1

Y-12 Y-12 plant uranium discharges, Y-12 plant cultural resources survey, verification and 

validation of the Y-12 lung counting system.

08/18/2008 3

TOTAL N/A N/A 5,378
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

68 of 69 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for LLNL

Database/Source Keywords/Phrases Hits Uploaded into 

SRDB Viewable Hits

Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC)

https://www.dtic.mil/

COMPLETED 07/30/2015

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 15,872 2 15,872

DOE Hanford DDRS

http://reading-room.labworks.org/Catalog/Search.aspx

COMPLETED 05/15/2015

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 2 1 2 

DOE Legacy Management Considered Sites

http://www.lm.doe.gov/considered_Sites/

COMPLETED 11/02/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 310 0 N/A

DOE Nevada Site Office - National Nuclear Safety 

Administration (NNSA)

http://nnsa.energy.gov

COMPLETED 06/11/2015

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 0 0 0 

DOE OpenNet

http://www.osti.gov/opennet/advancedsearch.jsp

COMPLETED 11/06/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 4,816 9 N/A 

DOE OSTI SciTech Connect

http://www.osti.gov/scitech

COMPLETED 11/05/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 500,399 45 N/A

Energy Employees Claimant Assistance Project 

(EECAP)

http://www.eecap.org

COMPLETED 06/11/2015

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 0 0 N/A

Google

http://www.google.com

COMPLETED 12/19/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 1,516,164,034 68 N/A

HP Journal

http://journals.lww.com/healthphysics/pages/default.aspx

COMPLETED 06/11/2015

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 33 12 33

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uoeh20#.VtS2f00o670

COMPLETED 06/11/2015

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 345 0 345
SEC-00221 02-12-2016 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

69 of 69 

Database/Source Keywords/Phrases Hits Uploaded into 

SRDB Viewable Hits

National Academies Press

http://www.nap.edu/

COMPLETED 11/07/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 1,012 0 N/A

NEPIS

http://nepis.epa.gov/

COMPLETED 11/10/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 10,062 3 N/A

NRC ADAMS Reading Room

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html

COMPLETED 11/07/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 8,855 97 N/A

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

http://www.usace.army.mil/

COMPLETED 11/07/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 0 0 N/A

U.S. Transuranium & Uranium Registries 

http://www.ustur.wsu.edu/

COMPLETED 11/07/2014

Database search terms are available in the Excel file called “Copy of 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Rev 00 (83 13) 01-11-16.” 11 0 N/A